| ==================================== | 
 | Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq) | 
 | ==================================== | 
 |  | 
 | :Date: September, 2010 | 
 | :Author: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> | 
 | :Author: Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org> | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Introduction | 
 | ============ | 
 |  | 
 | There are many cases where an asynchronous process execution context | 
 | is needed and the workqueue (wq) API is the most commonly used | 
 | mechanism for such cases. | 
 |  | 
 | When such an asynchronous execution context is needed, a work item | 
 | describing which function to execute is put on a queue.  An | 
 | independent thread serves as the asynchronous execution context.  The | 
 | queue is called workqueue and the thread is called worker. | 
 |  | 
 | While there are work items on the workqueue the worker executes the | 
 | functions associated with the work items one after the other.  When | 
 | there is no work item left on the workqueue the worker becomes idle. | 
 | When a new work item gets queued, the worker begins executing again. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Why cmwq? | 
 | ========= | 
 |  | 
 | In the original wq implementation, a multi threaded (MT) wq had one | 
 | worker thread per CPU and a single threaded (ST) wq had one worker | 
 | thread system-wide.  A single MT wq needed to keep around the same | 
 | number of workers as the number of CPUs.  The kernel grew a lot of MT | 
 | wq users over the years and with the number of CPU cores continuously | 
 | rising, some systems saturated the default 32k PID space just booting | 
 | up. | 
 |  | 
 | Although MT wq wasted a lot of resource, the level of concurrency | 
 | provided was unsatisfactory.  The limitation was common to both ST and | 
 | MT wq albeit less severe on MT.  Each wq maintained its own separate | 
 | worker pool.  An MT wq could provide only one execution context per CPU | 
 | while an ST wq one for the whole system.  Work items had to compete for | 
 | those very limited execution contexts leading to various problems | 
 | including proneness to deadlocks around the single execution context. | 
 |  | 
 | The tension between the provided level of concurrency and resource | 
 | usage also forced its users to make unnecessary tradeoffs like libata | 
 | choosing to use ST wq for polling PIOs and accepting an unnecessary | 
 | limitation that no two polling PIOs can progress at the same time.  As | 
 | MT wq don't provide much better concurrency, users which require | 
 | higher level of concurrency, like async or fscache, had to implement | 
 | their own thread pool. | 
 |  | 
 | Concurrency Managed Workqueue (cmwq) is a reimplementation of wq with | 
 | focus on the following goals. | 
 |  | 
 | * Maintain compatibility with the original workqueue API. | 
 |  | 
 | * Use per-CPU unified worker pools shared by all wq to provide | 
 |   flexible level of concurrency on demand without wasting a lot of | 
 |   resource. | 
 |  | 
 | * Automatically regulate worker pool and level of concurrency so that | 
 |   the API users don't need to worry about such details. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | The Design | 
 | ========== | 
 |  | 
 | In order to ease the asynchronous execution of functions a new | 
 | abstraction, the work item, is introduced. | 
 |  | 
 | A work item is a simple struct that holds a pointer to the function | 
 | that is to be executed asynchronously.  Whenever a driver or subsystem | 
 | wants a function to be executed asynchronously it has to set up a work | 
 | item pointing to that function and queue that work item on a | 
 | workqueue. | 
 |  | 
 | Special purpose threads, called worker threads, execute the functions | 
 | off of the queue, one after the other.  If no work is queued, the | 
 | worker threads become idle.  These worker threads are managed in so | 
 | called worker-pools. | 
 |  | 
 | The cmwq design differentiates between the user-facing workqueues that | 
 | subsystems and drivers queue work items on and the backend mechanism | 
 | which manages worker-pools and processes the queued work items. | 
 |  | 
 | There are two worker-pools, one for normal work items and the other | 
 | for high priority ones, for each possible CPU and some extra | 
 | worker-pools to serve work items queued on unbound workqueues - the | 
 | number of these backing pools is dynamic. | 
 |  | 
 | Subsystems and drivers can create and queue work items through special | 
 | workqueue API functions as they see fit. They can influence some | 
 | aspects of the way the work items are executed by setting flags on the | 
 | workqueue they are putting the work item on. These flags include | 
 | things like CPU locality, concurrency limits, priority and more.  To | 
 | get a detailed overview refer to the API description of | 
 | ``alloc_workqueue()`` below. | 
 |  | 
 | When a work item is queued to a workqueue, the target worker-pool is | 
 | determined according to the queue parameters and workqueue attributes | 
 | and appended on the shared worklist of the worker-pool.  For example, | 
 | unless specifically overridden, a work item of a bound workqueue will | 
 | be queued on the worklist of either normal or highpri worker-pool that | 
 | is associated to the CPU the issuer is running on. | 
 |  | 
 | For any worker pool implementation, managing the concurrency level | 
 | (how many execution contexts are active) is an important issue.  cmwq | 
 | tries to keep the concurrency at a minimal but sufficient level. | 
 | Minimal to save resources and sufficient in that the system is used at | 
 | its full capacity. | 
 |  | 
 | Each worker-pool bound to an actual CPU implements concurrency | 
 | management by hooking into the scheduler.  The worker-pool is notified | 
 | whenever an active worker wakes up or sleeps and keeps track of the | 
 | number of the currently runnable workers.  Generally, work items are | 
 | not expected to hog a CPU and consume many cycles.  That means | 
 | maintaining just enough concurrency to prevent work processing from | 
 | stalling should be optimal.  As long as there are one or more runnable | 
 | workers on the CPU, the worker-pool doesn't start execution of a new | 
 | work, but, when the last running worker goes to sleep, it immediately | 
 | schedules a new worker so that the CPU doesn't sit idle while there | 
 | are pending work items.  This allows using a minimal number of workers | 
 | without losing execution bandwidth. | 
 |  | 
 | Keeping idle workers around doesn't cost other than the memory space | 
 | for kthreads, so cmwq holds onto idle ones for a while before killing | 
 | them. | 
 |  | 
 | For unbound workqueues, the number of backing pools is dynamic. | 
 | Unbound workqueue can be assigned custom attributes using | 
 | ``apply_workqueue_attrs()`` and workqueue will automatically create | 
 | backing worker pools matching the attributes.  The responsibility of | 
 | regulating concurrency level is on the users.  There is also a flag to | 
 | mark a bound wq to ignore the concurrency management.  Please refer to | 
 | the API section for details. | 
 |  | 
 | Forward progress guarantee relies on that workers can be created when | 
 | more execution contexts are necessary, which in turn is guaranteed | 
 | through the use of rescue workers.  All work items which might be used | 
 | on code paths that handle memory reclaim are required to be queued on | 
 | wq's that have a rescue-worker reserved for execution under memory | 
 | pressure.  Else it is possible that the worker-pool deadlocks waiting | 
 | for execution contexts to free up. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Application Programming Interface (API) | 
 | ======================================= | 
 |  | 
 | ``alloc_workqueue()`` allocates a wq.  The original | 
 | ``create_*workqueue()`` functions are deprecated and scheduled for | 
 | removal.  ``alloc_workqueue()`` takes three arguments - ``@name``, | 
 | ``@flags`` and ``@max_active``.  ``@name`` is the name of the wq and | 
 | also used as the name of the rescuer thread if there is one. | 
 |  | 
 | A wq no longer manages execution resources but serves as a domain for | 
 | forward progress guarantee, flush and work item attributes. ``@flags`` | 
 | and ``@max_active`` control how work items are assigned execution | 
 | resources, scheduled and executed. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | ``flags`` | 
 | --------- | 
 |  | 
 | ``WQ_UNBOUND`` | 
 |   Work items queued to an unbound wq are served by the special | 
 |   worker-pools which host workers which are not bound to any | 
 |   specific CPU.  This makes the wq behave as a simple execution | 
 |   context provider without concurrency management.  The unbound | 
 |   worker-pools try to start execution of work items as soon as | 
 |   possible.  Unbound wq sacrifices locality but is useful for | 
 |   the following cases. | 
 |  | 
 |   * Wide fluctuation in the concurrency level requirement is | 
 |     expected and using bound wq may end up creating large number | 
 |     of mostly unused workers across different CPUs as the issuer | 
 |     hops through different CPUs. | 
 |  | 
 |   * Long running CPU intensive workloads which can be better | 
 |     managed by the system scheduler. | 
 |  | 
 | ``WQ_FREEZABLE`` | 
 |   A freezable wq participates in the freeze phase of the system | 
 |   suspend operations.  Work items on the wq are drained and no | 
 |   new work item starts execution until thawed. | 
 |  | 
 | ``WQ_MEM_RECLAIM`` | 
 |   All wq which might be used in the memory reclaim paths **MUST** | 
 |   have this flag set.  The wq is guaranteed to have at least one | 
 |   execution context regardless of memory pressure. | 
 |  | 
 | ``WQ_HIGHPRI`` | 
 |   Work items of a highpri wq are queued to the highpri | 
 |   worker-pool of the target cpu.  Highpri worker-pools are | 
 |   served by worker threads with elevated nice level. | 
 |  | 
 |   Note that normal and highpri worker-pools don't interact with | 
 |   each other.  Each maintains its separate pool of workers and | 
 |   implements concurrency management among its workers. | 
 |  | 
 | ``WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE`` | 
 |   Work items of a CPU intensive wq do not contribute to the | 
 |   concurrency level.  In other words, runnable CPU intensive | 
 |   work items will not prevent other work items in the same | 
 |   worker-pool from starting execution.  This is useful for bound | 
 |   work items which are expected to hog CPU cycles so that their | 
 |   execution is regulated by the system scheduler. | 
 |  | 
 |   Although CPU intensive work items don't contribute to the | 
 |   concurrency level, start of their executions is still | 
 |   regulated by the concurrency management and runnable | 
 |   non-CPU-intensive work items can delay execution of CPU | 
 |   intensive work items. | 
 |  | 
 |   This flag is meaningless for unbound wq. | 
 |  | 
 | Note that the flag ``WQ_NON_REENTRANT`` no longer exists as all | 
 | workqueues are now non-reentrant - any work item is guaranteed to be | 
 | executed by at most one worker system-wide at any given time. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | ``max_active`` | 
 | -------------- | 
 |  | 
 | ``@max_active`` determines the maximum number of execution contexts | 
 | per CPU which can be assigned to the work items of a wq.  For example, | 
 | with ``@max_active`` of 16, at most 16 work items of the wq can be | 
 | executing at the same time per CPU. | 
 |  | 
 | Currently, for a bound wq, the maximum limit for ``@max_active`` is | 
 | 512 and the default value used when 0 is specified is 256.  For an | 
 | unbound wq, the limit is higher of 512 and 4 * | 
 | ``num_possible_cpus()``.  These values are chosen sufficiently high | 
 | such that they are not the limiting factor while providing protection | 
 | in runaway cases. | 
 |  | 
 | The number of active work items of a wq is usually regulated by the | 
 | users of the wq, more specifically, by how many work items the users | 
 | may queue at the same time.  Unless there is a specific need for | 
 | throttling the number of active work items, specifying '0' is | 
 | recommended. | 
 |  | 
 | Some users depend on the strict execution ordering of ST wq.  The | 
 | combination of ``@max_active`` of 1 and ``WQ_UNBOUND`` used to | 
 | achieve this behavior.  Work items on such wq were always queued to the | 
 | unbound worker-pools and only one work item could be active at any given | 
 | time thus achieving the same ordering property as ST wq. | 
 |  | 
 | In the current implementation the above configuration only guarantees | 
 | ST behavior within a given NUMA node. Instead ``alloc_ordered_queue()`` should | 
 | be used to achieve system-wide ST behavior. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Example Execution Scenarios | 
 | =========================== | 
 |  | 
 | The following example execution scenarios try to illustrate how cmwq | 
 | behave under different configurations. | 
 |  | 
 |  Work items w0, w1, w2 are queued to a bound wq q0 on the same CPU. | 
 |  w0 burns CPU for 5ms then sleeps for 10ms then burns CPU for 5ms | 
 |  again before finishing.  w1 and w2 burn CPU for 5ms then sleep for | 
 |  10ms. | 
 |  | 
 | Ignoring all other tasks, works and processing overhead, and assuming | 
 | simple FIFO scheduling, the following is one highly simplified version | 
 | of possible sequences of events with the original wq. :: | 
 |  | 
 |  TIME IN MSECS	EVENT | 
 |  0		w0 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  5		w0 sleeps | 
 |  15		w0 wakes up and burns CPU | 
 |  20		w0 finishes | 
 |  20		w1 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  25		w1 sleeps | 
 |  35		w1 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  35		w2 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  40		w2 sleeps | 
 |  50		w2 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  | 
 | And with cmwq with ``@max_active`` >= 3, :: | 
 |  | 
 |  TIME IN MSECS	EVENT | 
 |  0		w0 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  5		w0 sleeps | 
 |  5		w1 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  10		w1 sleeps | 
 |  10		w2 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  15		w2 sleeps | 
 |  15		w0 wakes up and burns CPU | 
 |  20		w0 finishes | 
 |  20		w1 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  25		w2 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  | 
 | If ``@max_active`` == 2, :: | 
 |  | 
 |  TIME IN MSECS	EVENT | 
 |  0		w0 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  5		w0 sleeps | 
 |  5		w1 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  10		w1 sleeps | 
 |  15		w0 wakes up and burns CPU | 
 |  20		w0 finishes | 
 |  20		w1 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  20		w2 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  25		w2 sleeps | 
 |  35		w2 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  | 
 | Now, let's assume w1 and w2 are queued to a different wq q1 which has | 
 | ``WQ_CPU_INTENSIVE`` set, :: | 
 |  | 
 |  TIME IN MSECS	EVENT | 
 |  0		w0 starts and burns CPU | 
 |  5		w0 sleeps | 
 |  5		w1 and w2 start and burn CPU | 
 |  10		w1 sleeps | 
 |  15		w2 sleeps | 
 |  15		w0 wakes up and burns CPU | 
 |  20		w0 finishes | 
 |  20		w1 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  25		w2 wakes up and finishes | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Guidelines | 
 | ========== | 
 |  | 
 | * Do not forget to use ``WQ_MEM_RECLAIM`` if a wq may process work | 
 |   items which are used during memory reclaim.  Each wq with | 
 |   ``WQ_MEM_RECLAIM`` set has an execution context reserved for it.  If | 
 |   there is dependency among multiple work items used during memory | 
 |   reclaim, they should be queued to separate wq each with | 
 |   ``WQ_MEM_RECLAIM``. | 
 |  | 
 | * Unless strict ordering is required, there is no need to use ST wq. | 
 |  | 
 | * Unless there is a specific need, using 0 for @max_active is | 
 |   recommended.  In most use cases, concurrency level usually stays | 
 |   well under the default limit. | 
 |  | 
 | * A wq serves as a domain for forward progress guarantee | 
 |   (``WQ_MEM_RECLAIM``, flush and work item attributes.  Work items | 
 |   which are not involved in memory reclaim and don't need to be | 
 |   flushed as a part of a group of work items, and don't require any | 
 |   special attribute, can use one of the system wq.  There is no | 
 |   difference in execution characteristics between using a dedicated wq | 
 |   and a system wq. | 
 |  | 
 | * Unless work items are expected to consume a huge amount of CPU | 
 |   cycles, using a bound wq is usually beneficial due to the increased | 
 |   level of locality in wq operations and work item execution. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Debugging | 
 | ========= | 
 |  | 
 | Because the work functions are executed by generic worker threads | 
 | there are a few tricks needed to shed some light on misbehaving | 
 | workqueue users. | 
 |  | 
 | Worker threads show up in the process list as: :: | 
 |  | 
 |   root      5671  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    12:07   0:00 [kworker/0:1] | 
 |   root      5672  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    12:07   0:00 [kworker/1:2] | 
 |   root      5673  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    12:12   0:00 [kworker/0:0] | 
 |   root      5674  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    12:13   0:00 [kworker/1:0] | 
 |  | 
 | If kworkers are going crazy (using too much cpu), there are two types | 
 | of possible problems: | 
 |  | 
 | 	1. Something being scheduled in rapid succession | 
 | 	2. A single work item that consumes lots of cpu cycles | 
 |  | 
 | The first one can be tracked using tracing: :: | 
 |  | 
 | 	$ echo workqueue:workqueue_queue_work > /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/set_event | 
 | 	$ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_pipe > out.txt | 
 | 	(wait a few secs) | 
 | 	^C | 
 |  | 
 | If something is busy looping on work queueing, it would be dominating | 
 | the output and the offender can be determined with the work item | 
 | function. | 
 |  | 
 | For the second type of problems it should be possible to just check | 
 | the stack trace of the offending worker thread. :: | 
 |  | 
 | 	$ cat /proc/THE_OFFENDING_KWORKER/stack | 
 |  | 
 | The work item's function should be trivially visible in the stack | 
 | trace. | 
 |  | 
 |  | 
 | Kernel Inline Documentations Reference | 
 | ====================================== | 
 |  | 
 | .. kernel-doc:: include/linux/workqueue.h |