public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>,
	Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>,
	Juri Lelli <[email protected]>,
	Vincent Guittot <[email protected]>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <[email protected]>,
	Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>,
	Ben Segall <[email protected]>, Mel Gorman <[email protected]>,
	Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
	Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Subject: [RFC PATCH] sched: Invoke io_wq_worker_sleeping() with enabled preemption
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:37:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)

During a context switch the scheduler invokes wq_worker_sleeping() with
disabled preemption. Disabling preemption is needed because it protects
access to `worker->sleeping'. As an optimisation it avoids invoking
schedule() within the schedule path as part of possible wake up (thus
preempt_enable_no_resched() afterwards).

The io-wq has been added to the mix in the same section with disabled
preemption. This breaks on PREEMPT_RT because io_wq_worker_sleeping()
acquires a spinlock_t. Also within the schedule() the spinlock_t must be
acquired after tsk_is_pi_blocked() otherwise it will block on the sleeping lock
again while scheduling out.

While playing with `io_uring-bench' I didn't notice a significant
latency spike after converting io_wqe::lock to a raw_spinlock_t. The
latency was more or less the same.

I don't see a significant reason why this lock should become a
raw_spinlock_t therefore I suggest to move it after the
tsk_is_pi_blocked() check.
The io_worker::flags are usually modified under the lock except in the
scheduler path. Ideally the lock is always acquired since the
IO_WORKER_F_UP flag is set early in the startup and IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING
should be set unless the task loops within schedule(). I *think* ::flags
requires the same protection like workqueue's ::sleeping and therefore I
move the check within the locked section.

Any feedback on this vs raw_spinlock_t?

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
---
 fs/io-wq.c          |  8 ++++----
 kernel/sched/core.c | 10 +++++-----
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
index e92c4724480ca..a7e07b3ac5b95 100644
--- a/fs/io-wq.c
+++ b/fs/io-wq.c
@@ -623,15 +623,15 @@ void io_wq_worker_sleeping(struct task_struct *tsk)
 	struct io_worker *worker = kthread_data(tsk);
 	struct io_wqe *wqe = worker->wqe;
 
+	spin_lock_irq(&wqe->lock);
 	if (!(worker->flags & IO_WORKER_F_UP))
-		return;
+		goto out;
 	if (!(worker->flags & IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING))
-		return;
+		goto out;
 
 	worker->flags &= ~IO_WORKER_F_RUNNING;
-
-	spin_lock_irq(&wqe->lock);
 	io_wqe_dec_running(wqe, worker);
+out:
 	spin_unlock_irq(&wqe->lock);
 }
 
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 3bbb60b97c73c..b76c0f27bd95e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -4694,18 +4694,18 @@ static inline void sched_submit_work(struct task_struct *tsk)
 	 * in the possible wakeup of a kworker and because wq_worker_sleeping()
 	 * requires it.
 	 */
-	if (tsk->flags & (PF_WQ_WORKER | PF_IO_WORKER)) {
+	if (tsk->flags & PF_WQ_WORKER) {
 		preempt_disable();
-		if (tsk->flags & PF_WQ_WORKER)
-			wq_worker_sleeping(tsk);
-		else
-			io_wq_worker_sleeping(tsk);
+		wq_worker_sleeping(tsk);
 		preempt_enable_no_resched();
 	}
 
 	if (tsk_is_pi_blocked(tsk))
 		return;
 
+	if (tsk->flags & PF_IO_WORKER)
+		io_wq_worker_sleeping(tsk);
+
 	/*
 	 * If we are going to sleep and we have plugged IO queued,
 	 * make sure to submit it to avoid deadlocks.
-- 
2.28.0


             reply	other threads:[~2020-08-19 12:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-19 12:37 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2020-08-19 13:15 ` [RFC PATCH] sched: Invoke io_wq_worker_sleeping() with enabled preemption peterz
2020-08-19 13:18   ` Jens Axboe
2020-08-19 19:44     ` [PATCH] io_wq: Make io_wqe::lock a raw_spinlock_t Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-09-01  8:41       ` [PATCH v2] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-09-01 14:17         ` Jens Axboe
2020-08-19 13:33   ` [RFC PATCH] sched: Invoke io_wq_worker_sleeping() with enabled preemption Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-19 14:21     ` peterz
2020-08-19 19:55       ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: Bring the PF_IO_WORKER and PF_WQ_WORKER bits closer together Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-19 20:00         ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: Cache task_struct::flags in sched_submit_work() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-08-19 20:11           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-09-07 12:58         ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: Bring the PF_IO_WORKER and PF_WQ_WORKER bits closer together Will Deacon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox