From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756084AbcBISCn (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:02:43 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:33303 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752763AbcBISCl (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:02:41 -0500
Message-ID: <1455040955.3604.15.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Crashes with 874bbfe600a6 in 3.18.25
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,
        Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Bilik <daniel.bilik@neosystem.cz>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 19:02:35 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1455040613.3604.11.camel@gmail.com>
References: <1454551217.3677.27.camel@gmail.com>
	 <20160205164923.GC4401@htj.duckdns.org>
	 <1454705231.3819.151.camel@gmail.com>
	 <20160205205456.GG4401@htj.duckdns.org>
	 <1454705989.3819.158.camel@gmail.com>
	 <20160205210606.GH4401@htj.duckdns.org>
	 <1455031885.3807.74.camel@gmail.com>
	 <CA+55aFwQDMuieCNEh86GXKoCjj+B6aZBTt--y7sUCtqzLkPf5Q@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20160209165024.GA3741@mtj.duckdns.org> <1455037444.3604.3.camel@gmail.com>
	 <20160209175400.GC3741@mtj.duckdns.org>
	 <1455040613.3604.11.camel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.16.5 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 18:56 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 12:54 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Mike.
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 06:04:04PM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > workqueue: schedule WORK_CPU_UNBOUND work on wq_unbound_cpumask
> > > CPUs
> > > 
> > > WORK_CPU_UNBOUND work items queued to a bound workqueue always
> > > run
> > > locally.  This is a good thing normally, but not when the user
> > > has
> > > asked us to keep unbound work away from certain CPUs.  Round
> > > robin
> > > these to wq_unbound_cpumask CPUs instead, as perturbation
> > > avoidance
> > > trumps performance.
> > 
> > I don't think doing this by default for everyone is a good idea.  A
> > lot of workqueue usages tend to touch whatever the scheduler was
> > touching after all.  Doing things per-cpu is generally a pretty
> > good
> > thing.
> 
> It doesn't do anything unless the user twiddles the mask to exclude
> certain (think no_hz_full) CPUs, so there are no clueless victims.

(a plus: testers/robots can twiddle mask to help find bugs, _and_
nohz_full people can use it if they so choose)