All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_struct->exclusive mode
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:29:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131004192944.GU15690@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131004184640.GA17567@redhat.com>

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:46:40PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Add rcu_sync_struct->exclusive boolean set by rcu_sync_init(),
> it obviously controls the exclusiveness of rcu_sync_enter().
> This is what percpu_down_write() actually wants.
> 
> We turn ->gp_wait into "struct completion gp_comp", it is used
> as a resource counter in "exclusive" mode. Otherwise we only use
> its completion->wait member for wait_event/wake_up_all. We never
> mix the completion/wait_queue_head_t operations.
> 
> Note: it would be more clean to do __complete_locked() under
> ->rss_lock in rcu_sync_exit() in the "else" branch, but we don't
> have this trivial helper.

Something equivalent in available functions would be:

	rss->gp_comp.done++;
	__wake_up_locked_key(&rss->gp_comp.wait, TASK_NORMAL, NULL);


>  struct rcu_sync_struct {
>  	int			gp_state;
>  	int			gp_count;
> -	wait_queue_head_t	gp_wait;
> +	struct completion	gp_comp;
>  
>  	int			cb_state;
>  	struct rcu_head		cb_head;
>  
> +	bool			exclusive;
>  	struct rcu_sync_ops	*ops;
>  };

I suppose we have a hole before or after cb_state to fit exclusive in.,
now it looks like we're going to create another hole before the *ops
pointer.

> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
>  enum { GP_IDLE = 0, GP_PENDING, GP_PASSED };
>  enum { CB_IDLE = 0, CB_PENDING, CB_REPLAY };
>  
> -#define	rss_lock	gp_wait.lock
> +#define	rss_lock	gp_comp.wait.lock

Should we, for convenience, also do:

#define rss_wait	gp_comp.wait

>  #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU
>  #define __INIT_HELD(func)	.held = func,
> @@ -33,11 +33,13 @@ struct rcu_sync_ops rcu_sync_ops_array[] = {
>  	},
>  };
>  
> -void rcu_sync_init(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss, enum rcu_sync_type type)
> +void rcu_sync_init(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss,
> +			enum rcu_sync_type type, bool excl)
>  {
>  	memset(rss, 0, sizeof(*rss));
> -	init_waitqueue_head(&rss->gp_wait);
> +	init_completion(&rss->gp_comp);
>  	rss->ops = rcu_sync_ops_array + type;
> +	rss->exclusive = excl;
>  }
>  
>  void rcu_sync_enter(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss)
> @@ -56,9 +58,13 @@ void rcu_sync_enter(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss)
>  	if (need_sync) {
>  		rss->ops->sync();
>  		rss->gp_state = GP_PASSED;
> -		wake_up_all(&rss->gp_wait);
> +		if (!rss->exclusive)
> +			wake_up_all(&rss->gp_comp.wait);
>  	} else if (need_wait) {
> -		wait_event(rss->gp_wait, rss->gp_state == GP_PASSED);
> +		if (!rss->exclusive)
> +			wait_event(rss->gp_comp.wait, rss->gp_state == GP_PASSED);
> +		else
> +			wait_for_completion(&rss->gp_comp);

I'm still not entirely sure why we need the completion; we already have
the gp_count variable and a waitqueue; together those should be able to
implement the condition/semaphore variable, no?

wait_for_completion:

	spin_lock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);
	if (rss->gp_count > 0) {
		__wait_event_locked(rss->gp_wait, (rss->gp_count > 0),
					TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, 1, 0);
	}
	spin_unlock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);


complete:

	bool excl = rss->excl;

	spin_lock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);
	if (!--rss_gp_count) {
		__wake_up_locked_key(&rss->gp_comp.wait, TASK_NORMAL, NULL);
	}
	spin_unlock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);


All we would need would be something like:

--- a/include/linux/wait.h
+++ b/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ do {									\
 })
 
 
-#define __wait_event_interruptible_locked(wq, condition, exclusive, irq) \
+#define __wait_event_locked(wq, condition, state, exclusive, irq) 	\
 ({									\
 	int __ret = 0;							\
 	DEFINE_WAIT(__wait);						\
@@ -431,8 +431,8 @@ do {									\
 	do {								\
 		if (likely(list_empty(&__wait.task_list)))		\
 			__add_wait_queue_tail(&(wq), &__wait);		\
-		set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);			\
-		if (signal_pending(current)) {				\
+		set_current_state(state);				\
+		if (___wait_signal_pending(state)) {			\
 			__ret = -ERESTARTSYS;				\
 			break;						\
 		}							\
@@ -451,6 +451,8 @@ do {									\
 	__ret;								\
 })
 
+#define __wait_event_interruptible_locked(wq, condition, exclusive, irq)\
+	__wait_event_locked(wq, condition, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, exclusive, irq)
 
 /**
  * wait_event_interruptible_locked - sleep until a condition gets true

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-04 19:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-04 18:46 [PATCH 0/5] rcusync: validations + dtor + exclusive Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 1/5] rcusync: introduce struct rcu_sync_ops Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:12   ` Linus Torvalds
2013-10-04 19:22     ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:30     ` Steven Rostedt
2013-10-04 19:38       ` Linus Torvalds
2013-10-04 19:42         ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-05 17:21           ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-05 17:17         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-08  9:13           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-08 15:33             ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-08 16:34               ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 2/5] rcusync: add the CONFIG_PROVE_RCU checks Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 3/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_dtor() Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 4/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_struct->exclusive mode Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:29   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-10-04 19:56     ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 20:41       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-06 13:22         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-07 10:49           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 5/5] rcusync: make rcu_sync_enter() return "bool" Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:32 ` [PATCH 0/5] rcusync: validations + dtor + exclusive Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 21:28   ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-05 17:22   ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20131004192944.GU15690@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.