Donate to e Foundation | Murena handsets with /e/OS | Own a part of Murena! Learn more

Commit 5c0338c6 authored by Tejun Heo's avatar Tejun Heo
Browse files

workqueue: restore WQ_UNBOUND/max_active==1 to be ordered 



The combination of WQ_UNBOUND and max_active == 1 used to imply
ordered execution.  After NUMA affinity 4c16bd32 ("workqueue:
implement NUMA affinity for unbound workqueues"), this is no longer
true due to per-node worker pools.

While the right way to create an ordered workqueue is
alloc_ordered_workqueue(), the documentation has been misleading for a
long time and people do use WQ_UNBOUND and max_active == 1 for ordered
workqueues which can lead to subtle bugs which are very difficult to
trigger.

It's unlikely that we'd see noticeable performance impact by enforcing
ordering on WQ_UNBOUND / max_active == 1 workqueues.  Let's
automatically set __WQ_ORDERED for those workqueues.

Signed-off-by: default avatarTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: default avatarChristoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Reported-by: default avatarAlexei Potashnik <alexei@purestorage.com>
Fixes: 4c16bd32 ("workqueue: implement NUMA affinity for unbound workqueues")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.10+
parent 74cbd96b

kernel/workqueue.c

+10 −0
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -3929,6 +3929,16 @@ struct workqueue_struct *__alloc_workqueue_key(const char *fmt, 
	struct workqueue_struct *wq;

	struct pool_workqueue *pwq;



	/*

	 * Unbound && max_active == 1 used to imply ordered, which is no

	 * longer the case on NUMA machines due to per-node pools.  While

	 * alloc_ordered_workqueue() is the right way to create an ordered

	 * workqueue, keep the previous behavior to avoid subtle breakages

	 * on NUMA.

	 */

	if ((flags & WQ_UNBOUND) && max_active == 1)

		flags |= __WQ_ORDERED;



	/* see the comment above the definition of WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT */

	if ((flags & WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT) && wq_power_efficient)

		flags |= WQ_UNBOUND;