Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 5/6] net: usb: pegasus: Move long delayed work on system_dfl_long_wq
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: 2026-09-05 16:33:12
Also in:
linux-usb, lkml
On Sat, Sep 05, 2026 at 05:04:50PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 2026-08-28 10:10:01 [-0400], Alan Stern wrote:quoted
quoted
While this does make sense I don't see how this is related to this patch. The pegasus driver uses `system_long_wq'. This is a system wide workqueue_struct and is not limited to USB or this driver. This workqueue is per-CPU meaning if you enqueue the work item on CPU3 it will be executed on CPU3. However pegasus uses a delayed work item and the timer can fire on any CPU so even if it is enqueued on CPU3 it could be executed on CPU1.It doesn't matter what CPU the work item runs on. Here's the deadlock sequence, in brief: USB device reset cannot proceed until network interface's ->pre_reset() method returns. The ->pre_reset() method cannot return until its call to flush_workqueue() returns. flush_workqueue() cannot return until the already executing work item finishes.Not sure where you pointing at but you have an unordered workqueue (such as system_long_wq/ system_dfl_long_wq then you can have more than one work item executed in parallel. One item does not stall the other so you can flush your work item (waiting for it's completion) without having all other work item completed. There is no need to flush the workqueue, that would force _all_ work item to complete. Flushing a workqueue would make sense if you have your own and you want to ensure that _all_ work items, that has been enqueued, did complete and you don't want to check them one by one. To illustrate your point, the example would translate to something like the following: | static struct work_struct test_worker_busy; | static struct work_struct test_worker_reg; | | static void test_worker_complete_fn(struct work_struct *work) | { | int count = 0; | while (1) { | ssleep(1); | count++; | if (count > 10) | break; | } | pr_err("%s()\n leaving", __func__); | } | | static void test_worker_busy_fn(struct work_struct *work) | { | while (1) { | ssleep(1); | pr_err("%s()\n", __func__); | } | } | | static void the_workers(void) | { | INIT_WORK(&test_worker_busy, test_worker_busy_fn); | INIT_WORK(&test_worker_reg, test_worker_complete_fn); | | queue_work(system_long_wq, &test_worker_busy); | ssleep(1); | queue_work(system_long_wq, &test_worker_reg); | pr_err("%s() starting...\n", __func__); | ssleep(1); | pr_err("%s() cancel\n", __func__); | flush_work(&test_worker_reg); | pr_err("%s() moving on\n", __func__); | } which leads to: | [ 4.136593] the_workers() starting... | [ 4.137007] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 5.161198] the_workers() cancel | [ 5.164832] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 6.184710] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 7.208525] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 8.232754] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 9.256522] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 10.280716] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 11.304523] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 12.328671] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 13.352517] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 14.376842] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 15.400539] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 15.402676] test_worker_complete_fn() | [ 15.403290] the_workers() moving on | [ 16.424483] test_worker_busy_fn() | [ 17.448524] test_worker_busy_fn() which means the test_worker_reg work item completed despite the fact that test_worker_busy remained busy. Of course flushing the workqueue system_long_wq (via flush_workqueue()) would stall but also raise a warning…quoted
The work item cannot finish until its kmalloc() call returns. kmalloc() won't return until the kernel can free up memory by writing some pages to the swap partition. The write to the swap partition cannot take place until the usb_storage/uas driver carries it out. usb_storage/uas cannot do anything until the USB device reset is finished.as shown, this is not a concern.quoted
quoted
Therefore the suggested change system_long_wq -> system_dfl_long_wq should not make a difference here: it is a different workqueue and it is unbound (instead of per-CPU) but given the usage it is unchanged but more obvious. Also its usage recommendations (use this for long running items) is the same. The plan is remove system_long_wq from the tree.The point Oliver was making is that the driver shouldn't be using a general-purpose workqueue at all. Switching from one general-purpose workqueue to another ignores this point; it's not the right thing to do.Still the wrong thing to do? The driver should do either flush_work() or cancel_work_sync() (not flush_workqueue()).
I think we're in agreement. If the driver relies on calling flush_workqueue(), it should not use a general-purpose workqueue. However, flush_work() or cancel_work_sync() is okay on an unordered general-purpose workqueue. If Oliver still has any objections, he can raise them. Alan Stern