workqueue.txt 16 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422
  1. Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq)
  2. September, 2010 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
  3. Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>
  4. CONTENTS
  5. 1. Introduction
  6. 2. Why cmwq?
  7. 3. The Design
  8. 4. Application Programming Interface (API)
  9. 5. Example Execution Scenarios
  10. 6. Guidelines
  11. 7. Debugging
  12. 1. Introduction
  13. There are many cases where an asynchronous process execution context
  14. is needed and the workqueue (wq) API is the most commonly used
  15. mechanism for such cases.
  16. When such an asynchronous execution context is needed, a work item
  17. describing which function to execute is put on a queue. An
  18. independent thread serves as the asynchronous execution context. The
  19. queue is called workqueue and the thread is called worker.
  20. While there are work items on the workqueue the worker executes the
  21. functions associated with the work items one after the other. When
  22. there is no work item left on the workqueue the worker becomes idle.
  23. When a new work item gets queued, the worker begins executing again.
  24. 2. Why cmwq?
  25. In the original wq implementation, a multi threaded (MT) wq had one
  26. worker thread per CPU and a single threaded (ST) wq had one worker
  27. thread system-wide. A single MT wq needed to keep around the same
  28. number of workers as the number of CPUs. The kernel grew a lot of MT
  29. wq users over the years and with the number of CPU cores continuously
  30. rising, some systems saturated the default 32k PID space just booting
  31. up.
  32. Although MT wq wasted a lot of resource, the level of concurrency
  33. provided was unsatisfactory. The limitation was common to both ST and
  34. MT wq albeit less severe on MT. Each wq maintained its own separate
  35. worker pool. A MT wq could provide only one execution context per CPU
  36. while a ST wq one for the whole system. Work items had to compete for
  37. those very limited execution contexts leading to various problems
  38. including proneness to deadlocks around the single execution context.
  39. The tension between the provided level of concurrency and resource
  40. usage also forced its users to make unnecessary tradeoffs like libata
  41. choosing to use ST wq for polling PIOs and accepting an unnecessary
  42. limitation that no two polling PIOs can progress at the same time. As
  43. MT wq don't provide much better concurrency, users which require
  44. higher level of concurrency, like async or fscache, had to implement
  45. their own thread pool.
  46. Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq) is a reimplementation of wq with
  47. focus on the following goals.
  48. * Maintain compatibility with the original workqueue API.
  49. * Use per-CPU unified worker pools shared by all wq to provide
  50. flexible level of concurrency on demand without wasting a lot of
  51. resource.
  52. * Automatically regulate worker pool and level of concurrency so that
  53. the API users don't need to worry about such details.
  54. 3. The Design
  55. In order to ease the asynchronous execution of functions a new
  56. abstraction, the work item, is introduced.
  57. A work item is a simple struct that holds a pointer to the function
  58. that is to be executed asynchronously. Whenever a driver or subsystem
  59. wants a function to be executed asynchronously it has to set up a work
  60. item pointing to that function and queue that work item on a
  61. workqueue.
  62. Special purpose threads, called worker threads, execute the functions
  63. off of the queue, one after the other. If no work is queued, the
  64. worker threads become idle. These worker threads are managed in so
  65. called thread-pools.
  66. The cmwq design differentiates between the user-facing workqueues that
  67. subsystems and drivers queue work items on and the backend mechanism
  68. which manages thread-pool and processes the queued work items.
  69. The backend is called gcwq. There is one gcwq for each possible CPU
  70. and one gcwq to serve work items queued on unbound workqueues.
  71. Subsystems and drivers can create and queue work items through special
  72. workqueue API functions as they see fit. They can influence some
  73. aspects of the way the work items are executed by setting flags on the
  74. workqueue they are putting the work item on. These flags include
  75. things like CPU locality, reentrancy, concurrency limits and more. To
  76. get a detailed overview refer to the API description of
  77. alloc_workqueue() below.
  78. When a work item is queued to a workqueue, the target gcwq is
  79. determined according to the queue parameters and workqueue attributes
  80. and appended on the shared worklist of the gcwq. For example, unless
  81. specifically overridden, a work item of a bound workqueue will be
  82. queued on the worklist of exactly that gcwq that is associated to the
  83. CPU the issuer is running on.
  84. For any worker pool implementation, managing the concurrency level
  85. (how many execution contexts are active) is an important issue. cmwq
  86. tries to keep the concurrency at a minimal but sufficient level.
  87. Minimal to save resources and sufficient in that the system is used at
  88. its full capacity.
  89. Each gcwq bound to an actual CPU implements concurrency management by
  90. hooking into the scheduler. The gcwq is notified whenever an active
  91. worker wakes up or sleeps and keeps track of the number of the
  92. currently runnable workers. Generally, work items are not expected to
  93. hog a CPU and consume many cycles. That means maintaining just enough
  94. concurrency to prevent work processing from stalling should be
  95. optimal. As long as there are one or more runnable workers on the
  96. CPU, the gcwq doesn't start execution of a new work, but, when the
  97. last running worker goes to sleep, it immediately schedules a new
  98. worker so that the CPU doesn't sit idle while there are pending work
  99. items. This allows using a minimal number of workers without losing
  100. execution bandwidth.
  101. Keeping idle workers around doesn't cost other than the memory space
  102. for kthreads, so cmwq holds onto idle ones for a while before killing
  103. them.
  104. For an unbound wq, the above concurrency management doesn't apply and
  105. the gcwq for the pseudo unbound CPU tries to start executing all work
  106. items as soon as possible. The responsibility of regulating
  107. concurrency level is on the users. There is also a flag to mark a
  108. bound wq to ignore the concurrency management. Please refer to the
  109. API section for details.
  110. Forward progress guarantee relies on that workers can be created when
  111. more execution contexts are necessary, which in turn is guaranteed
  112. through the use of rescue workers. All work items which might be used
  113. on code paths that handle memory reclaim are required to be queued on
  114. wq's that have a rescue-worker reserved for execution under memory
  115. pressure. Else it is possible that the thread-pool deadlocks waiting
  116. for execution contexts to free up.
  117. 4. Application Programming Interface (API)
  118. alloc_workqueue() allocates a wq. The original create_*workqueue()
  119. functions are deprecated and scheduled for removal. alloc_workqueue()
  120. takes three arguments - @name, @flags and @max_active. @name is the
  121. name of the wq and also used as the name of the rescuer thread if
  122. there is one.
  123. A wq no longer manages execution resources but serves as a domain for
  124. forward progress guarantee, flush and work item attributes. @flags
  125. and @max_active control how work items are assigned execution
  126. resources, scheduled and executed.
  127. @flags:
  128. WQ_NON_REENTRANT
  129. By default, a wq guarantees non-reentrance only on the same
  130. CPU. A work item may not be executed concurrently on the same
  131. CPU by multiple workers but is allowed to be executed
  132. concurrently on multiple CPUs. This flag makes sure
  133. non-reentrance is enforced across all CPUs. Work items queued
  134. to a non-reentrant wq are guaranteed to be executed by at most
  135. one worker system-wide at any given time.
  136. WQ_UNBOUND
  137. Work items queued to an unbound wq are served by a special
  138. gcwq which hosts workers which are not bound to any specific
  139. CPU. This makes the wq behave as a simple execution context
  140. provider without concurrency management. The unbound gcwq
  141. tries to start execution of work items as soon as possible.
  142. Unbound wq sacrifices locality but is useful for the following
  143. cases.
  144. * Wide fluctuation in the concurrency level requirement is
  145. expected and using bound wq may end up creating large number
  146. of mostly unused workers across different CPUs as the issuer
  147. hops through different CPUs.
  148. * Long running CPU intensive workloads which can be better
  149. managed by the system scheduler.
  150. WQ_FREEZABLE
  151. A freezable wq participates in the freeze phase of the system
  152. suspend operations. Work items on the wq are drained and no
  153. new work item starts execution until thawed.
  154. WQ_MEM_RECLAIM
  155. All wq which might be used in the memory reclaim paths _MUST_
  156. have this flag set. The wq is guaranteed to have at least one
  157. execution context regardless of memory pressure.
  158. WQ_HIGHPRI
  159. Work items of a highpri wq are queued at the head of the
  160. worklist of the target gcwq and start execution regardless of
  161. the current concurrency level. In other words, highpri work
  162. items will always start execution as soon as execution
  163. resource is available.
  164. Ordering among highpri work items is preserved - a highpri
  165. work item queued after another highpri work item will start
  166. execution after the earlier highpri work item starts.
  167. Although highpri work items are not held back by other
  168. runnable work items, they still contribute to the concurrency
  169. level. Highpri work items in runnable state will prevent
  170. non-highpri work items from starting execution.
  171. This flag is meaningless for unbound wq.
  172. WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE
  173. Work items of a CPU intensive wq do not contribute to the
  174. concurrency level. In other words, runnable CPU intensive
  175. work items will not prevent other work items from starting
  176. execution. This is useful for bound work items which are
  177. expected to hog CPU cycles so that their execution is
  178. regulated by the system scheduler.
  179. Although CPU intensive work items don't contribute to the
  180. concurrency level, start of their executions is still
  181. regulated by the concurrency management and runnable
  182. non-CPU-intensive work items can delay execution of CPU
  183. intensive work items.
  184. This flag is meaningless for unbound wq.
  185. WQ_HIGHPRI | WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE
  186. This combination makes the wq avoid interaction with
  187. concurrency management completely and behave as a simple
  188. per-CPU execution context provider. Work items queued on a
  189. highpri CPU-intensive wq start execution as soon as resources
  190. are available and don't affect execution of other work items.
  191. @max_active:
  192. @max_active determines the maximum number of execution contexts per
  193. CPU which can be assigned to the work items of a wq. For example,
  194. with @max_active of 16, at most 16 work items of the wq can be
  195. executing at the same time per CPU.
  196. Currently, for a bound wq, the maximum limit for @max_active is 512
  197. and the default value used when 0 is specified is 256. For an unbound
  198. wq, the limit is higher of 512 and 4 * num_possible_cpus(). These
  199. values are chosen sufficiently high such that they are not the
  200. limiting factor while providing protection in runaway cases.
  201. The number of active work items of a wq is usually regulated by the
  202. users of the wq, more specifically, by how many work items the users
  203. may queue at the same time. Unless there is a specific need for
  204. throttling the number of active work items, specifying '0' is
  205. recommended.
  206. Some users depend on the strict execution ordering of ST wq. The
  207. combination of @max_active of 1 and WQ_UNBOUND is used to achieve this
  208. behavior. Work items on such wq are always queued to the unbound gcwq
  209. and only one work item can be active at any given time thus achieving
  210. the same ordering property as ST wq.
  211. 5. Example Execution Scenarios
  212. The following example execution scenarios try to illustrate how cmwq
  213. behave under different configurations.
  214. Work items w0, w1, w2 are queued to a bound wq q0 on the same CPU.
  215. w0 burns CPU for 5ms then sleeps for 10ms then burns CPU for 5ms
  216. again before finishing. w1 and w2 burn CPU for 5ms then sleep for
  217. 10ms.
  218. Ignoring all other tasks, works and processing overhead, and assuming
  219. simple FIFO scheduling, the following is one highly simplified version
  220. of possible sequences of events with the original wq.
  221. TIME IN MSECS EVENT
  222. 0 w0 starts and burns CPU
  223. 5 w0 sleeps
  224. 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU
  225. 20 w0 finishes
  226. 20 w1 starts and burns CPU
  227. 25 w1 sleeps
  228. 35 w1 wakes up and finishes
  229. 35 w2 starts and burns CPU
  230. 40 w2 sleeps
  231. 50 w2 wakes up and finishes
  232. And with cmwq with @max_active >= 3,
  233. TIME IN MSECS EVENT
  234. 0 w0 starts and burns CPU
  235. 5 w0 sleeps
  236. 5 w1 starts and burns CPU
  237. 10 w1 sleeps
  238. 10 w2 starts and burns CPU
  239. 15 w2 sleeps
  240. 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU
  241. 20 w0 finishes
  242. 20 w1 wakes up and finishes
  243. 25 w2 wakes up and finishes
  244. If @max_active == 2,
  245. TIME IN MSECS EVENT
  246. 0 w0 starts and burns CPU
  247. 5 w0 sleeps
  248. 5 w1 starts and burns CPU
  249. 10 w1 sleeps
  250. 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU
  251. 20 w0 finishes
  252. 20 w1 wakes up and finishes
  253. 20 w2 starts and burns CPU
  254. 25 w2 sleeps
  255. 35 w2 wakes up and finishes
  256. Now, let's assume w1 and w2 are queued to a different wq q1 which has
  257. WQ_HIGHPRI set,
  258. TIME IN MSECS EVENT
  259. 0 w1 and w2 start and burn CPU
  260. 5 w1 sleeps
  261. 10 w2 sleeps
  262. 10 w0 starts and burns CPU
  263. 15 w0 sleeps
  264. 15 w1 wakes up and finishes
  265. 20 w2 wakes up and finishes
  266. 25 w0 wakes up and burns CPU
  267. 30 w0 finishes
  268. If q1 has WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE set,
  269. TIME IN MSECS EVENT
  270. 0 w0 starts and burns CPU
  271. 5 w0 sleeps
  272. 5 w1 and w2 start and burn CPU
  273. 10 w1 sleeps
  274. 15 w2 sleeps
  275. 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU
  276. 20 w0 finishes
  277. 20 w1 wakes up and finishes
  278. 25 w2 wakes up and finishes
  279. 6. Guidelines
  280. * Do not forget to use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM if a wq may process work items
  281. which are used during memory reclaim. Each wq with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM
  282. set has an execution context reserved for it. If there is
  283. dependency among multiple work items used during memory reclaim,
  284. they should be queued to separate wq each with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM.
  285. * Unless strict ordering is required, there is no need to use ST wq.
  286. * Unless there is a specific need, using 0 for @max_active is
  287. recommended. In most use cases, concurrency level usually stays
  288. well under the default limit.
  289. * A wq serves as a domain for forward progress guarantee
  290. (WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, flush and work item attributes. Work items which
  291. are not involved in memory reclaim and don't need to be flushed as a
  292. part of a group of work items, and don't require any special
  293. attribute, can use one of the system wq. There is no difference in
  294. execution characteristics between using a dedicated wq and a system
  295. wq.
  296. * Unless work items are expected to consume a huge amount of CPU
  297. cycles, using a bound wq is usually beneficial due to the increased
  298. level of locality in wq operations and work item execution.
  299. 7. Debugging
  300. Because the work functions are executed by generic worker threads
  301. there are a few tricks needed to shed some light on misbehaving
  302. workqueue users.
  303. Worker threads show up in the process list as:
  304. root 5671 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:07 0:00 [kworker/0:1]
  305. root 5672 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:07 0:00 [kworker/1:2]
  306. root 5673 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:12 0:00 [kworker/0:0]
  307. root 5674 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:13 0:00 [kworker/1:0]
  308. If kworkers are going crazy (using too much cpu), there are two types
  309. of possible problems:
  310. 1. Something beeing scheduled in rapid succession
  311. 2. A single work item that consumes lots of cpu cycles
  312. The first one can be tracked using tracing:
  313. $ echo workqueue:workqueue_queue_work > /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/set_event
  314. $ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_pipe > out.txt
  315. (wait a few secs)
  316. ^C
  317. If something is busy looping on work queueing, it would be dominating
  318. the output and the offender can be determined with the work item
  319. function.
  320. For the second type of problems it should be possible to just check
  321. the stack trace of the offending worker thread.
  322. $ cat /proc/THE_OFFENDING_KWORKER/stack
  323. The work item's function should be trivially visible in the stack
  324. trace.