Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | [PATCH 11/21] workqueue: also allowed wq->mutex protect for_each_pwq() | Date | Wed, 20 Mar 2013 03:28:11 +0800 |
| |
1) pwqs of a wq are modified with wq->mutex held, so we can use wq->mutex for read access like for_each_pwq(). 2) pwqs of a wq are instance's attribute, reviewers expects wq->mutex protected it. 3) This patch is the most important step remove pwq_lock. only wq->mutex is enough, don't need two locks. 4) after it, flush_workqueue_prep_pwqs() and drain_workqueue() don't disable irq so such long time, disabling irq for long time adds latency to hardirq and hurts RT peoples.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> --- kernel/workqueue.c | 34 ++++++++++++++-------------------- 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c index 469269e..41e7737 100644 --- a/kernel/workqueue.c +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c @@ -301,8 +301,9 @@ static void copy_workqueue_attrs(struct workqueue_attrs *to, lockdep_is_held(&pools_mutex), \ "sched RCU or pools_mutex should be held") -#define assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock() \ +#define assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock(wq) \ rcu_lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_sched_held() || \ + lockdep_is_held(&wq->mutex) || \ lockdep_is_held(&pwq_lock), \ "sched RCU or pwq_lock should be held") @@ -367,7 +368,7 @@ static void copy_workqueue_attrs(struct workqueue_attrs *to, */ #define for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) \ list_for_each_entry_rcu((pwq), &(wq)->pwqs, pwqs_node) \ - if (({ assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock(); false; })) { } \ + if (({ assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock(wq); false; })) { } \ else #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_WORK @@ -512,7 +513,7 @@ static int worker_pool_assign_id(struct worker_pool *pool) */ static struct pool_workqueue *first_pwq(struct workqueue_struct *wq) { - assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock(); + assert_rcu_or_pwq_lock(wq); return list_first_or_null_rcu(&wq->pwqs, struct pool_workqueue, pwqs_node); } @@ -2479,12 +2480,10 @@ static bool flush_workqueue_prep_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq, atomic_set(&wq->nr_pwqs_to_flush, 1); } - local_irq_disable(); - for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) { struct worker_pool *pool = pwq->pool; - spin_lock(&pool->lock); + spin_lock_irq(&pool->lock); if (flush_color >= 0) { WARN_ON_ONCE(pwq->flush_color != -1); @@ -2501,11 +2500,9 @@ static bool flush_workqueue_prep_pwqs(struct workqueue_struct *wq, pwq->work_color = work_color; } - spin_unlock(&pool->lock); + spin_unlock_irq(&pool->lock); } - local_irq_enable(); - if (flush_color >= 0 && atomic_dec_and_test(&wq->nr_pwqs_to_flush)) complete(&wq->first_flusher->done); @@ -2693,14 +2690,14 @@ void drain_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq) reflush: flush_workqueue(wq); - local_irq_disable(); + mutex_lock(&wq->mutex); for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) { bool drained; - spin_lock(&pwq->pool->lock); + spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock); drained = !pwq->nr_active && list_empty(&pwq->delayed_works); - spin_unlock(&pwq->pool->lock); + spin_unlock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock); if (drained) continue; @@ -2710,13 +2707,10 @@ reflush: pr_warn("workqueue %s: drain_workqueue() isn't complete after %u tries\n", wq->name, flush_cnt); - local_irq_enable(); + mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); goto reflush; } - local_irq_enable(); - - mutex_lock(&wq->mutex); if (!--wq->nr_drainers) wq->flags &= ~__WQ_DRAINING; mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); @@ -3846,13 +3840,13 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq) drain_workqueue(wq); /* sanity checks */ - spin_lock_irq(&pwq_lock); + mutex_lock(&wq->mutex); for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) { int i; for (i = 0; i < WORK_NR_COLORS; i++) { if (WARN_ON(pwq->nr_in_flight[i])) { - spin_unlock_irq(&pwq_lock); + mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); return; } } @@ -3860,11 +3854,11 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_struct *wq) if (WARN_ON(pwq->refcnt > 1) || WARN_ON(pwq->nr_active) || WARN_ON(!list_empty(&pwq->delayed_works))) { - spin_unlock_irq(&pwq_lock); + mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); return; } } - spin_unlock_irq(&pwq_lock); + mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex); /* * wq list is used to freeze wq, remove from list after -- 1.7.7.6
| |