All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: Add cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 10:32:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130502173257.GX3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1305021848450.31548@ja.ssi.bg>

On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:54:05PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> 
> 	Hello,
> 
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:22:08PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > > > +extern int __cond_resched_rcu(void);
> > > > +
> > > > +#define cond_resched_rcu() ({			\
> > > > +	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, 0);	\
> > > 
> > > 	I see your goal. But digging into __might_sleep()
> > > I see that rcu_sleep_check() will scream for the non-preempt
> > > case because we are under rcu_read_lock.
> > 
> > 
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> > #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 0
> > #else
> > #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 1
> > #endif
> > 
> > #define cond_resched_rcu() ({	\
> > 	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET);	\
> > 	__cond_resched_rcu();	\
> > })
> > 
> > Should work I think..
> 
> 	I implemented your idea.
> 
> 	I tested the following patch in 2 variants,
> TINY_RCU and CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU. I see the

Could you please also try CONFIG_TREE_RCU?

> error if extra rcu_read_lock is added for testing.
> 
> 	I'm using the PREEMPT_ACTIVE flag to indicate
> that we are already under lock. It should work because
> __might_sleep is not called with such bit. I also tried to
> add new flag in include/linux/hardirq.h but PREEMPT_ACTIVE
> depends on the arch, so this alternative looked difficult to
> implement.
> 
>  include/linux/rcupdate.h |    7 ++++---
>  include/linux/sched.h    |   14 ++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/core.c      |   20 ++++++++++++++++++--
>  3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index b758ce1..b594759 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -480,9 +480,10 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
>  }
>  #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
> -#define rcu_sleep_check()						\
> +#define rcu_sleep_check(locked)						\
>  	do {								\
> -		rcu_preempt_sleep_check();				\
> +		if (!(locked))						\
> +			rcu_preempt_sleep_check();			\
>  		rcu_lockdep_assert(!lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map),	\
>  				   "Illegal context switch in RCU-bh"	\
>  				   " read-side critical section");	\
> @@ -494,7 +495,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
>  #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
>  #define rcu_lockdep_assert(c, s) do { } while (0)
> -#define rcu_sleep_check() do { } while (0)
> +#define rcu_sleep_check(locked) do { } while (0)
> 
>  #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index e692a02..027deea 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2608,6 +2608,20 @@ extern int __cond_resched_softirq(void);
>  	__cond_resched_softirq();					\
>  })
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> +#define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET	1
> +#else
> +#define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET	PREEMPT_CHECK_OFFSET
> +#endif
> +
> +extern int __cond_resched_rcu(void);
> +
> +#define cond_resched_rcu() ({					\
> +	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_ACTIVE |	\
> +					  PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET);	\
> +	__cond_resched_rcu();					\
> +})
> +
>  /*
>   * Does a critical section need to be broken due to another
>   * task waiting?: (technically does not depend on CONFIG_PREEMPT,
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 67d0465..2724be7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2793,7 +2793,7 @@ static inline void schedule_debug(struct task_struct *prev)
>  	 */
>  	if (unlikely(in_atomic_preempt_off() && !prev->exit_state))
>  		__schedule_bug(prev);
> -	rcu_sleep_check();
> +	rcu_sleep_check(0);
> 
>  	profile_hit(SCHED_PROFILING, __builtin_return_address(0));
> 
> @@ -4364,6 +4364,20 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cond_resched_softirq);
> 
> +int __sched __cond_resched_rcu(void)
> +{
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> +	if (should_resched()) {
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
> +		__cond_resched();
> +		rcu_read_lock();
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +#endif
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cond_resched_rcu);
> +
>  /**
>   * yield - yield the current processor to other threads.
>   *
> @@ -7062,7 +7076,9 @@ void __might_sleep(const char *file, int line, int preempt_offset)
>  {
>  	static unsigned long prev_jiffy;	/* ratelimiting */
> 
> -	rcu_sleep_check(); /* WARN_ON_ONCE() by default, no rate limit reqd. */
> +	/* WARN_ON_ONCE() by default, no rate limit reqd. */
> +	rcu_sleep_check(preempt_offset & PREEMPT_ACTIVE);

Color me confused.

From what I can see, the two values passed in through preempt_offset
are PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET and SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET.  PREEMPT_ACTIVE
is normally a high-order bit, above PREEMPT_MASK, SOFTIRQ_MASK, and
HARDIRQ_MASK.

PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET and SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET have only low-order bits,
so I don't see how rcu_sleep_check() is passed anything other than zero.
Am I going blind, or what?

							Thanx, Paul

> +	preempt_offset &= ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE;
>  	if ((preempt_count_equals(preempt_offset) && !irqs_disabled()) ||
>  	    system_state != SYSTEM_RUNNING || oops_in_progress)
>  		return;
> -- 
> 1.7.3.4
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: Add cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 10:32:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130502173257.GX3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1305021848450.31548@ja.ssi.bg>

On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:54:05PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> 
> 	Hello,
> 
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:22:08PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > > > +extern int __cond_resched_rcu(void);
> > > > +
> > > > +#define cond_resched_rcu() ({			\
> > > > +	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, 0);	\
> > > 
> > > 	I see your goal. But digging into __might_sleep()
> > > I see that rcu_sleep_check() will scream for the non-preempt
> > > case because we are under rcu_read_lock.
> > 
> > 
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> > #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 0
> > #else
> > #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 1
> > #endif
> > 
> > #define cond_resched_rcu() ({	\
> > 	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET);	\
> > 	__cond_resched_rcu();	\
> > })
> > 
> > Should work I think..
> 
> 	I implemented your idea.
> 
> 	I tested the following patch in 2 variants,
> TINY_RCU and CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU. I see the

Could you please also try CONFIG_TREE_RCU?

> error if extra rcu_read_lock is added for testing.
> 
> 	I'm using the PREEMPT_ACTIVE flag to indicate
> that we are already under lock. It should work because
> __might_sleep is not called with such bit. I also tried to
> add new flag in include/linux/hardirq.h but PREEMPT_ACTIVE
> depends on the arch, so this alternative looked difficult to
> implement.
> 
>  include/linux/rcupdate.h |    7 ++++---
>  include/linux/sched.h    |   14 ++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/core.c      |   20 ++++++++++++++++++--
>  3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index b758ce1..b594759 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -480,9 +480,10 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
>  }
>  #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
> -#define rcu_sleep_check()						\
> +#define rcu_sleep_check(locked)						\
>  	do {								\
> -		rcu_preempt_sleep_check();				\
> +		if (!(locked))						\
> +			rcu_preempt_sleep_check();			\
>  		rcu_lockdep_assert(!lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map),	\
>  				   "Illegal context switch in RCU-bh"	\
>  				   " read-side critical section");	\
> @@ -494,7 +495,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
>  #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
>  #define rcu_lockdep_assert(c, s) do { } while (0)
> -#define rcu_sleep_check() do { } while (0)
> +#define rcu_sleep_check(locked) do { } while (0)
> 
>  #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index e692a02..027deea 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2608,6 +2608,20 @@ extern int __cond_resched_softirq(void);
>  	__cond_resched_softirq();					\
>  })
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> +#define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET	1
> +#else
> +#define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET	PREEMPT_CHECK_OFFSET
> +#endif
> +
> +extern int __cond_resched_rcu(void);
> +
> +#define cond_resched_rcu() ({					\
> +	__might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_ACTIVE |	\
> +					  PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET);	\
> +	__cond_resched_rcu();					\
> +})
> +
>  /*
>   * Does a critical section need to be broken due to another
>   * task waiting?: (technically does not depend on CONFIG_PREEMPT,
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 67d0465..2724be7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2793,7 +2793,7 @@ static inline void schedule_debug(struct task_struct *prev)
>  	 */
>  	if (unlikely(in_atomic_preempt_off() && !prev->exit_state))
>  		__schedule_bug(prev);
> -	rcu_sleep_check();
> +	rcu_sleep_check(0);
> 
>  	profile_hit(SCHED_PROFILING, __builtin_return_address(0));
> 
> @@ -4364,6 +4364,20 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cond_resched_softirq);
> 
> +int __sched __cond_resched_rcu(void)
> +{
> +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
> +	if (should_resched()) {
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
> +		__cond_resched();
> +		rcu_read_lock();
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +#endif
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cond_resched_rcu);
> +
>  /**
>   * yield - yield the current processor to other threads.
>   *
> @@ -7062,7 +7076,9 @@ void __might_sleep(const char *file, int line, int preempt_offset)
>  {
>  	static unsigned long prev_jiffy;	/* ratelimiting */
> 
> -	rcu_sleep_check(); /* WARN_ON_ONCE() by default, no rate limit reqd. */
> +	/* WARN_ON_ONCE() by default, no rate limit reqd. */
> +	rcu_sleep_check(preempt_offset & PREEMPT_ACTIVE);

Color me confused.

>From what I can see, the two values passed in through preempt_offset
are PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET and SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET.  PREEMPT_ACTIVE
is normally a high-order bit, above PREEMPT_MASK, SOFTIRQ_MASK, and
HARDIRQ_MASK.

PREEMPT_LOCK_OFFSET and SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET have only low-order bits,
so I don't see how rcu_sleep_check() is passed anything other than zero.
Am I going blind, or what?

							Thanx, Paul

> +	preempt_offset &= ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE;
>  	if ((preempt_count_equals(preempt_offset) && !irqs_disabled()) ||
>  	    system_state != SYSTEM_RUNNING || oops_in_progress)
>  		return;
> -- 
> 1.7.3.4
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2013-05-02 17:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-30  2:52 [PATCH v2 0/2] sched: Add cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper Simon Horman
2013-04-30  2:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Simon Horman
2013-04-30  7:12   ` Julian Anastasov
2013-04-30  7:29     ` Simon Horman
2013-04-30  7:52       ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-01  9:10         ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 12:46           ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-01 14:32             ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-02  7:27               ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 15:17             ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 15:29               ` Eric Dumazet
2013-05-01 15:59                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 16:02                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-01 16:57                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 17:30                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-01 14:22           ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-01 15:55             ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-01 18:22               ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-01 19:04                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-02  7:26                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-02 10:06                   ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-02 15:54                   ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-02 17:32                     ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-05-02 17:32                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-02 18:55                       ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-02 19:24                         ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-02 19:34                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-02 20:19                           ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-02 22:31                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-03  7:52                               ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-03 16:30                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-03 17:04                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-03 17:34                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-05-03 18:09                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-05-03 17:47                                   ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-04  7:23                                   ` Julian Anastasov
2013-05-04 18:03                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-04-30  2:52 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ipvs: Use cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper when dumping connections Simon Horman

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=20130502173257.GX3780@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=ja@ssi.bg \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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 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.