linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chenglong Tang <chenglongtang@google.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: regressions@lists.linux.dev, tj@kernel.org,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev,  linux-mm@kvack.org,
	lakitu-dev@google.com
Subject: [REGRESSION] workqueue/writeback: Severe CPU hang due to kworker proliferation during I/O flush and cgroup cleanup
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 17:29:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOdxtTYQye1Rtp-sG48Re+_ihD637NDXTG_V_uLkerg=m1Nbtw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Hello,

This is Chenglong from Google Container Optimized OS. I'm reporting a
severe CPU hang regression that occurs after a high volume of file
creation and subsequent cgroup cleanup.

Through bisection, the issue appears to be caused by a chain reaction
between three commits related to writeback, unbound workqueues, and
CPU-hogging detection. The issue is greatly alleviated on the latest
mainline kernel but is not fully resolved, still occurring
intermittently (~1 in 10 runs).

How to reproduce

The kernel v6.1 is good. The hang is reliably triggered(over 80%
chance) on kernels v6.6 and 6.12 and intermittently on
mainline(6.17-rc7) with the following steps:

Environment: A machine with a fast SSD and a high core count (e.g.,
Google Cloud's N2-standard-128).

Workload: Concurrently generate a large number of files (e.g., 2
million) using multiple services managed by systemd-run. This creates
significant I/O and cgroup churn.

Trigger: After the file generation completes, terminate the
systemd-run services.

Result: Shortly after the services are killed, the system's CPU load
spikes, leading to a massive number of kworker/+inode_switch_wbs
threads and a system-wide hang/livelock where the machine becomes
unresponsive (20s - 300s).

Analysis and Problematic Commits

1. The initial commit: The process begins with a worker that can get
stuck busy-waiting on a spinlock.

Commit: ("writeback, cgroup: release dying cgwbs by switching attached inodes")

Effect: This introduced the inode_switch_wbs_work_fn worker to clean
up cgroup writeback structures. Under our test load, this worker
appears to hit a highly contended wb->list_lock spinlock, causing it
to burn 100% CPU without sleeping.

2. The Kworker Explosion: A subsequent change misinterprets the
spinning worker from Stage 1, leading to a runaway feedback loop of
worker creation.

Commit: 616db8779b1e ("workqueue: Automatically mark CPU-hogging work
items CPU_INTENSIVE")

Effect: This logic sees the spinning worker, marks it as
CPU_INTENSIVE, and excludes it from concurrency management. To handle
the work backlog, it spawns a new kworker, which then also gets stuck
on the same lock, repeating the cycle. This directly causes the
kworker count to explode from <50 to 100-2000+.

3. The System-Wide Lockdown: The final piece allows this localized
worker explosion to saturate the entire system.

Commit: 8639ecebc9b1 ("workqueue: Implement non-strict affinity scope
for unbound workqueues")

Effect: This change introduced non-strict affinity as the default. It
allows the hundreds of kworkers created in Stage 2 to be spread by the
scheduler across all available CPU cores, turning the problem into a
system-wide hang.

Current Status and Mitigation

Mainline Status: On the latest mainline kernel, the hang is far less
frequent and the kworker counts are reduced back to normal (<50),
suggesting other changes have partially mitigated the issue. However,
the hang still occurs, and when it does, the kworker count still
explodes (e.g., 300+), indicating the underlying feedback loop
remains.

Workaround: A reliable mitigation is to revert to the old workqueue
behavior by setting affinity_strict to 1. This contains the kworker
proliferation to a single CPU pod, preventing the system-wide hang.

Questions

Given that the issue is not fully resolved, could you please provide
some guidance?

1. Is this a known issue, and are there patches in development that
might fully address the underlying spinlock contention or the kworker
feedback loop?

2. Is there a better long-term mitigation we can apply other than
forcing strict affinity?

Thank you for your time and help.

Best regards,

Chenglong


             reply	other threads:[~2025-09-25  0:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-25  0:29 Chenglong Tang [this message]
2025-09-26 19:54 ` Chenglong Tang
2025-09-26 19:59   ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-26 20:07     ` Chenglong Tang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-09-25  0:24 Chenglong Tang
2025-09-25  0:52 ` Tejun Heo
2025-09-25 16:58   ` Chenglong Tang
2025-09-26 19:50   ` Chenglong Tang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAOdxtTYQye1Rtp-sG48Re+_ihD637NDXTG_V_uLkerg=m1Nbtw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=chenglongtang@google.com \
    --cc=lakitu-dev@google.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox