Re: [2.6.36-rc3] Workqueues, XFS, dependencies and deadlocks

[Tejun Heo]

On 09/07/2010 12:35 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Can you please help me a bit more?  Are you saying the following?
> 
> Work w0 starts execution on wq0.  w0 tries locking but fails.  Does
> delay(1) and requeues itself on wq0 hoping another work w1 would be
> queued on wq0 which will release the lock.  The requeueing should make
> w0 queued and executed after w1, but instead w1 never gets executed
> while w0 hogs the CPU constantly by re-executing itself.  Also, how
> does delay(1) help with chewing up CPU?  Are you talking about
> avoiding constant lock/unlock ops starving other lockers?  In such
> case, wouldn't cpu_relax() make more sense?

Ooh, almost forgot.  There was nr_active underflow bug in workqueue
code which could lead to malfunctioning max_active regulation and
problems during queue freezing, so you could be hitting that too.  I
sent out pull request some time ago but hasn't been pulled into
mainline yet.  Can you please pull from the following branch and add
WQ_HIGHPRI as discussed before and see whether the problem is still
reproducible?  And if the problem is reproducible, can you please
trigger sysrq thread dump and attach it?

 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git for-linus

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/