From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Stop chasing QS if another CPU did it for us
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:33:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101210233329.GB1713@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101210225855.GJ2125@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 02:58:55PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:11:10PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > When a CPU is idle and others CPUs handled its extended
> > quiescent state to complete grace periods on its behalf,
> > it will catch up with completed grace periods numbers
> > when it wakes up.
> >
> > But at this point there might be no more grace period to
> > complete, but still the woken CPU always keeps its stale
> > qs_pending value and will then continue to chase quiescent
> > states even if its not needed anymore.
> >
> > This results in clusters of spurious softirqs until a new
> > real grace period is started. Because if we continue to
> > chase quiescent states but we have completed every grace
> > periods, rcu_report_qs_rdp() is puzzled and makes that
> > state run into infinite loops.
> >
> > As suggested by Lai Jiangshan, just reset qs_pending if
> > someone completed every grace periods on our behalf.
>
> Nice!!!
>
> I have queued this patch, and followed it up with a patch that changes
> the condition to "rnp->qsmask & rdp->grpmask", which indicates that RCU
> needs a quiescent state from the CPU, and is valid regardless of how
> messed up the CPU is about which grace period is which.
>
> I am making a similar change to the check in __note_new_gpnum().
>
> Seem reasonable?
Look good yeah.
Thanks!
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > Suggested-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > ---
> > kernel/rcutree.c | 8 ++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > index ccdc04c..8c4ed60 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > @@ -681,6 +681,14 @@ __rcu_process_gp_end(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp, struct rcu_dat
> >
> > /* Remember that we saw this grace-period completion. */
> > rdp->completed = rnp->completed;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If another CPU handled our extended quiescent states and
> > + * we have no more grace period to complete yet, then stop
> > + * chasing quiescent states.
> > + */
> > + if (rdp->completed == rnp->gpnum)
> > + rdp->qs_pending = 0;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 1.7.3.2
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-10 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-10 21:11 [PATCH 0/2 v2] rcu: Fix series of spurious RCU softirqs Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-10 21:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Stop chasing QS if another CPU did it for us Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-10 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-10 23:33 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2010-12-10 21:14 ` [PATCH 0/2 v2] rcu: Fix series of spurious RCU softirqs Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <1292015471-19227-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
2010-12-10 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Keep gpnum and completed fields synchronized Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-10 23:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-10 23:47 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11 0:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11 0:15 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11 0:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11 1:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11 6:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11 0:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11 0:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11 0:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20101210233329.GB1713@nowhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.