]>
Commit | Line | Data |
---|---|---|
c54fce6e TH |
1 | |
2 | Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq) | |
3 | ||
4 | September, 2010 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> | |
5 | Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org> | |
6 | ||
7 | CONTENTS | |
8 | ||
9 | 1. Introduction | |
10 | 2. Why cmwq? | |
11 | 3. The Design | |
12 | 4. Application Programming Interface (API) | |
13 | 5. Example Execution Scenarios | |
14 | 6. Guidelines | |
e2de9e08 | 15 | 7. Debugging |
c54fce6e TH |
16 | |
17 | ||
18 | 1. Introduction | |
19 | ||
20 | There are many cases where an asynchronous process execution context | |
21 | is needed and the workqueue (wq) API is the most commonly used | |
22 | mechanism for such cases. | |
23 | ||
24 | When such an asynchronous execution context is needed, a work item | |
25 | describing which function to execute is put on a queue. An | |
26 | independent thread serves as the asynchronous execution context. The | |
27 | queue is called workqueue and the thread is called worker. | |
28 | ||
29 | While there are work items on the workqueue the worker executes the | |
30 | functions associated with the work items one after the other. When | |
31 | there is no work item left on the workqueue the worker becomes idle. | |
32 | When a new work item gets queued, the worker begins executing again. | |
33 | ||
34 | ||
35 | 2. Why cmwq? | |
36 | ||
37 | In the original wq implementation, a multi threaded (MT) wq had one | |
38 | worker thread per CPU and a single threaded (ST) wq had one worker | |
39 | thread system-wide. A single MT wq needed to keep around the same | |
40 | number of workers as the number of CPUs. The kernel grew a lot of MT | |
41 | wq users over the years and with the number of CPU cores continuously | |
42 | rising, some systems saturated the default 32k PID space just booting | |
43 | up. | |
44 | ||
45 | Although MT wq wasted a lot of resource, the level of concurrency | |
46 | provided was unsatisfactory. The limitation was common to both ST and | |
47 | MT wq albeit less severe on MT. Each wq maintained its own separate | |
48 | worker pool. A MT wq could provide only one execution context per CPU | |
49 | while a ST wq one for the whole system. Work items had to compete for | |
50 | those very limited execution contexts leading to various problems | |
51 | including proneness to deadlocks around the single execution context. | |
52 | ||
53 | The tension between the provided level of concurrency and resource | |
54 | usage also forced its users to make unnecessary tradeoffs like libata | |
55 | choosing to use ST wq for polling PIOs and accepting an unnecessary | |
56 | limitation that no two polling PIOs can progress at the same time. As | |
57 | MT wq don't provide much better concurrency, users which require | |
58 | higher level of concurrency, like async or fscache, had to implement | |
59 | their own thread pool. | |
60 | ||
61 | Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq) is a reimplementation of wq with | |
62 | focus on the following goals. | |
63 | ||
64 | * Maintain compatibility with the original workqueue API. | |
65 | ||
66 | * Use per-CPU unified worker pools shared by all wq to provide | |
67 | flexible level of concurrency on demand without wasting a lot of | |
68 | resource. | |
69 | ||
70 | * Automatically regulate worker pool and level of concurrency so that | |
71 | the API users don't need to worry about such details. | |
72 | ||
73 | ||
74 | 3. The Design | |
75 | ||
76 | In order to ease the asynchronous execution of functions a new | |
77 | abstraction, the work item, is introduced. | |
78 | ||
79 | A work item is a simple struct that holds a pointer to the function | |
80 | that is to be executed asynchronously. Whenever a driver or subsystem | |
81 | wants a function to be executed asynchronously it has to set up a work | |
82 | item pointing to that function and queue that work item on a | |
83 | workqueue. | |
84 | ||
85 | Special purpose threads, called worker threads, execute the functions | |
86 | off of the queue, one after the other. If no work is queued, the | |
87 | worker threads become idle. These worker threads are managed in so | |
546d30c4 | 88 | called worker-pools. |
c54fce6e TH |
89 | |
90 | The cmwq design differentiates between the user-facing workqueues that | |
91 | subsystems and drivers queue work items on and the backend mechanism | |
546d30c4 | 92 | which manages worker-pools and processes the queued work items. |
c54fce6e | 93 | |
546d30c4 L |
94 | There are two worker-pools, one for normal work items and the other |
95 | for high priority ones, for each possible CPU and some extra | |
96 | worker-pools to serve work items queued on unbound workqueues - the | |
97 | number of these backing pools is dynamic. | |
c54fce6e TH |
98 | |
99 | Subsystems and drivers can create and queue work items through special | |
100 | workqueue API functions as they see fit. They can influence some | |
101 | aspects of the way the work items are executed by setting flags on the | |
102 | workqueue they are putting the work item on. These flags include | |
12076373 TH |
103 | things like CPU locality, concurrency limits, priority and more. To |
104 | get a detailed overview refer to the API description of | |
c54fce6e TH |
105 | alloc_workqueue() below. |
106 | ||
546d30c4 L |
107 | When a work item is queued to a workqueue, the target worker-pool is |
108 | determined according to the queue parameters and workqueue attributes | |
109 | and appended on the shared worklist of the worker-pool. For example, | |
110 | unless specifically overridden, a work item of a bound workqueue will | |
111 | be queued on the worklist of either normal or highpri worker-pool that | |
112 | is associated to the CPU the issuer is running on. | |
c54fce6e TH |
113 | |
114 | For any worker pool implementation, managing the concurrency level | |
115 | (how many execution contexts are active) is an important issue. cmwq | |
116 | tries to keep the concurrency at a minimal but sufficient level. | |
117 | Minimal to save resources and sufficient in that the system is used at | |
118 | its full capacity. | |
119 | ||
546d30c4 L |
120 | Each worker-pool bound to an actual CPU implements concurrency |
121 | management by hooking into the scheduler. The worker-pool is notified | |
3270476a TH |
122 | whenever an active worker wakes up or sleeps and keeps track of the |
123 | number of the currently runnable workers. Generally, work items are | |
124 | not expected to hog a CPU and consume many cycles. That means | |
125 | maintaining just enough concurrency to prevent work processing from | |
126 | stalling should be optimal. As long as there are one or more runnable | |
546d30c4 | 127 | workers on the CPU, the worker-pool doesn't start execution of a new |
3270476a TH |
128 | work, but, when the last running worker goes to sleep, it immediately |
129 | schedules a new worker so that the CPU doesn't sit idle while there | |
130 | are pending work items. This allows using a minimal number of workers | |
131 | without losing execution bandwidth. | |
c54fce6e TH |
132 | |
133 | Keeping idle workers around doesn't cost other than the memory space | |
134 | for kthreads, so cmwq holds onto idle ones for a while before killing | |
135 | them. | |
136 | ||
546d30c4 L |
137 | For unbound workqueues, the number of backing pools is dynamic. |
138 | Unbound workqueue can be assigned custom attributes using | |
139 | apply_workqueue_attrs() and workqueue will automatically create | |
140 | backing worker pools matching the attributes. The responsibility of | |
141 | regulating concurrency level is on the users. There is also a flag to | |
142 | mark a bound wq to ignore the concurrency management. Please refer to | |
143 | the API section for details. | |
c54fce6e TH |
144 | |
145 | Forward progress guarantee relies on that workers can be created when | |
146 | more execution contexts are necessary, which in turn is guaranteed | |
147 | through the use of rescue workers. All work items which might be used | |
148 | on code paths that handle memory reclaim are required to be queued on | |
149 | wq's that have a rescue-worker reserved for execution under memory | |
546d30c4 | 150 | pressure. Else it is possible that the worker-pool deadlocks waiting |
c54fce6e TH |
151 | for execution contexts to free up. |
152 | ||
153 | ||
154 | 4. Application Programming Interface (API) | |
155 | ||
156 | alloc_workqueue() allocates a wq. The original create_*workqueue() | |
157 | functions are deprecated and scheduled for removal. alloc_workqueue() | |
158 | takes three arguments - @name, @flags and @max_active. @name is the | |
159 | name of the wq and also used as the name of the rescuer thread if | |
160 | there is one. | |
161 | ||
162 | A wq no longer manages execution resources but serves as a domain for | |
163 | forward progress guarantee, flush and work item attributes. @flags | |
164 | and @max_active control how work items are assigned execution | |
165 | resources, scheduled and executed. | |
166 | ||
167 | @flags: | |
168 | ||
c54fce6e TH |
169 | WQ_UNBOUND |
170 | ||
546d30c4 L |
171 | Work items queued to an unbound wq are served by the special |
172 | woker-pools which host workers which are not bound to any | |
173 | specific CPU. This makes the wq behave as a simple execution | |
174 | context provider without concurrency management. The unbound | |
175 | worker-pools try to start execution of work items as soon as | |
176 | possible. Unbound wq sacrifices locality but is useful for | |
177 | the following cases. | |
c54fce6e TH |
178 | |
179 | * Wide fluctuation in the concurrency level requirement is | |
180 | expected and using bound wq may end up creating large number | |
181 | of mostly unused workers across different CPUs as the issuer | |
182 | hops through different CPUs. | |
183 | ||
184 | * Long running CPU intensive workloads which can be better | |
185 | managed by the system scheduler. | |
186 | ||
58a69cb4 | 187 | WQ_FREEZABLE |
c54fce6e | 188 | |
58a69cb4 | 189 | A freezable wq participates in the freeze phase of the system |
c54fce6e TH |
190 | suspend operations. Work items on the wq are drained and no |
191 | new work item starts execution until thawed. | |
192 | ||
6370a6ad | 193 | WQ_MEM_RECLAIM |
c54fce6e TH |
194 | |
195 | All wq which might be used in the memory reclaim paths _MUST_ | |
6370a6ad TH |
196 | have this flag set. The wq is guaranteed to have at least one |
197 | execution context regardless of memory pressure. | |
c54fce6e TH |
198 | |
199 | WQ_HIGHPRI | |
200 | ||
3270476a | 201 | Work items of a highpri wq are queued to the highpri |
546d30c4 | 202 | worker-pool of the target cpu. Highpri worker-pools are |
3270476a | 203 | served by worker threads with elevated nice level. |
c54fce6e | 204 | |
546d30c4 | 205 | Note that normal and highpri worker-pools don't interact with |
3270476a TH |
206 | each other. Each maintain its separate pool of workers and |
207 | implements concurrency management among its workers. | |
c54fce6e TH |
208 | |
209 | WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE | |
210 | ||
211 | Work items of a CPU intensive wq do not contribute to the | |
212 | concurrency level. In other words, runnable CPU intensive | |
3270476a | 213 | work items will not prevent other work items in the same |
546d30c4 | 214 | worker-pool from starting execution. This is useful for bound |
3270476a TH |
215 | work items which are expected to hog CPU cycles so that their |
216 | execution is regulated by the system scheduler. | |
c54fce6e TH |
217 | |
218 | Although CPU intensive work items don't contribute to the | |
219 | concurrency level, start of their executions is still | |
220 | regulated by the concurrency management and runnable | |
221 | non-CPU-intensive work items can delay execution of CPU | |
222 | intensive work items. | |
223 | ||
224 | This flag is meaningless for unbound wq. | |
225 | ||
12076373 TH |
226 | Note that the flag WQ_NON_REENTRANT no longer exists as all workqueues |
227 | are now non-reentrant - any work item is guaranteed to be executed by | |
228 | at most one worker system-wide at any given time. | |
229 | ||
c54fce6e TH |
230 | @max_active: |
231 | ||
232 | @max_active determines the maximum number of execution contexts per | |
233 | CPU which can be assigned to the work items of a wq. For example, | |
234 | with @max_active of 16, at most 16 work items of the wq can be | |
235 | executing at the same time per CPU. | |
236 | ||
237 | Currently, for a bound wq, the maximum limit for @max_active is 512 | |
238 | and the default value used when 0 is specified is 256. For an unbound | |
239 | wq, the limit is higher of 512 and 4 * num_possible_cpus(). These | |
240 | values are chosen sufficiently high such that they are not the | |
241 | limiting factor while providing protection in runaway cases. | |
242 | ||
243 | The number of active work items of a wq is usually regulated by the | |
244 | users of the wq, more specifically, by how many work items the users | |
245 | may queue at the same time. Unless there is a specific need for | |
246 | throttling the number of active work items, specifying '0' is | |
247 | recommended. | |
248 | ||
249 | Some users depend on the strict execution ordering of ST wq. The | |
250 | combination of @max_active of 1 and WQ_UNBOUND is used to achieve this | |
546d30c4 L |
251 | behavior. Work items on such wq are always queued to the unbound |
252 | worker-pools and only one work item can be active at any given time thus | |
253 | achieving the same ordering property as ST wq. | |
c54fce6e TH |
254 | |
255 | ||
256 | 5. Example Execution Scenarios | |
257 | ||
258 | The following example execution scenarios try to illustrate how cmwq | |
259 | behave under different configurations. | |
260 | ||
261 | Work items w0, w1, w2 are queued to a bound wq q0 on the same CPU. | |
262 | w0 burns CPU for 5ms then sleeps for 10ms then burns CPU for 5ms | |
263 | again before finishing. w1 and w2 burn CPU for 5ms then sleep for | |
264 | 10ms. | |
265 | ||
266 | Ignoring all other tasks, works and processing overhead, and assuming | |
267 | simple FIFO scheduling, the following is one highly simplified version | |
268 | of possible sequences of events with the original wq. | |
269 | ||
270 | TIME IN MSECS EVENT | |
271 | 0 w0 starts and burns CPU | |
272 | 5 w0 sleeps | |
273 | 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU | |
274 | 20 w0 finishes | |
275 | 20 w1 starts and burns CPU | |
276 | 25 w1 sleeps | |
277 | 35 w1 wakes up and finishes | |
278 | 35 w2 starts and burns CPU | |
279 | 40 w2 sleeps | |
280 | 50 w2 wakes up and finishes | |
281 | ||
282 | And with cmwq with @max_active >= 3, | |
283 | ||
284 | TIME IN MSECS EVENT | |
285 | 0 w0 starts and burns CPU | |
286 | 5 w0 sleeps | |
287 | 5 w1 starts and burns CPU | |
288 | 10 w1 sleeps | |
289 | 10 w2 starts and burns CPU | |
290 | 15 w2 sleeps | |
291 | 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU | |
292 | 20 w0 finishes | |
293 | 20 w1 wakes up and finishes | |
294 | 25 w2 wakes up and finishes | |
295 | ||
296 | If @max_active == 2, | |
297 | ||
298 | TIME IN MSECS EVENT | |
299 | 0 w0 starts and burns CPU | |
300 | 5 w0 sleeps | |
301 | 5 w1 starts and burns CPU | |
302 | 10 w1 sleeps | |
303 | 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU | |
304 | 20 w0 finishes | |
305 | 20 w1 wakes up and finishes | |
306 | 20 w2 starts and burns CPU | |
307 | 25 w2 sleeps | |
308 | 35 w2 wakes up and finishes | |
309 | ||
310 | Now, let's assume w1 and w2 are queued to a different wq q1 which has | |
3270476a | 311 | WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE set, |
c54fce6e TH |
312 | |
313 | TIME IN MSECS EVENT | |
314 | 0 w0 starts and burns CPU | |
315 | 5 w0 sleeps | |
316 | 5 w1 and w2 start and burn CPU | |
317 | 10 w1 sleeps | |
318 | 15 w2 sleeps | |
319 | 15 w0 wakes up and burns CPU | |
320 | 20 w0 finishes | |
321 | 20 w1 wakes up and finishes | |
322 | 25 w2 wakes up and finishes | |
323 | ||
324 | ||
325 | 6. Guidelines | |
326 | ||
6370a6ad TH |
327 | * Do not forget to use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM if a wq may process work items |
328 | which are used during memory reclaim. Each wq with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | |
329 | set has an execution context reserved for it. If there is | |
330 | dependency among multiple work items used during memory reclaim, | |
331 | they should be queued to separate wq each with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM. | |
c54fce6e TH |
332 | |
333 | * Unless strict ordering is required, there is no need to use ST wq. | |
334 | ||
335 | * Unless there is a specific need, using 0 for @max_active is | |
336 | recommended. In most use cases, concurrency level usually stays | |
337 | well under the default limit. | |
338 | ||
6370a6ad TH |
339 | * A wq serves as a domain for forward progress guarantee |
340 | (WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, flush and work item attributes. Work items which | |
341 | are not involved in memory reclaim and don't need to be flushed as a | |
342 | part of a group of work items, and don't require any special | |
343 | attribute, can use one of the system wq. There is no difference in | |
344 | execution characteristics between using a dedicated wq and a system | |
345 | wq. | |
c54fce6e TH |
346 | |
347 | * Unless work items are expected to consume a huge amount of CPU | |
348 | cycles, using a bound wq is usually beneficial due to the increased | |
349 | level of locality in wq operations and work item execution. | |
e2de9e08 FM |
350 | |
351 | ||
352 | 7. Debugging | |
353 | ||
354 | Because the work functions are executed by generic worker threads | |
355 | there are a few tricks needed to shed some light on misbehaving | |
356 | workqueue users. | |
357 | ||
358 | Worker threads show up in the process list as: | |
359 | ||
360 | root 5671 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:07 0:00 [kworker/0:1] | |
361 | root 5672 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:07 0:00 [kworker/1:2] | |
362 | root 5673 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:12 0:00 [kworker/0:0] | |
363 | root 5674 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S 12:13 0:00 [kworker/1:0] | |
364 | ||
365 | If kworkers are going crazy (using too much cpu), there are two types | |
366 | of possible problems: | |
367 | ||
368 | 1. Something beeing scheduled in rapid succession | |
369 | 2. A single work item that consumes lots of cpu cycles | |
370 | ||
371 | The first one can be tracked using tracing: | |
372 | ||
373 | $ echo workqueue:workqueue_queue_work > /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/set_event | |
374 | $ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_pipe > out.txt | |
375 | (wait a few secs) | |
376 | ^C | |
377 | ||
378 | If something is busy looping on work queueing, it would be dominating | |
379 | the output and the offender can be determined with the work item | |
380 | function. | |
381 | ||
382 | For the second type of problems it should be possible to just check | |
383 | the stack trace of the offending worker thread. | |
384 | ||
385 | $ cat /proc/THE_OFFENDING_KWORKER/stack | |
386 | ||
387 | The work item's function should be trivially visible in the stack | |
388 | trace. |