From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Donald Buczek <buczek@molgen.mpg.de>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
dvteam@molgen.mpg.de, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Subject: Re: INFO: rcu_sched detected stalls on CPUs/tasks with `kswapd` and `mem_cgroup_shrink_node`
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 08:59:18 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161201165918.GG3924@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161201163614.GL3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 05:36:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 04:40:24AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 06:30:35AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > Sure, we all dislike IPIs, but I'm thinking this half-way point is
> > > sensible, no point in issuing user visible annoyance if indeed we can
> > > prod things back to life, no?
> > >
> > > Only if we utterly fail to make it respond should we bug the user with
> > > our failure..
> >
> > Sold! ;-)
> >
> > I will put together a patch later today.
> >
> > My intent is to hold off on the "upgrade cond_resched()" patch, one
> > step at a time. Longer term, I do very much like the idea of having
> > cond_resched() do both scheduling and RCU quiescent states, assuming
> > that this avoids performance pitfalls.
>
> Well, with the above change cond_resched() is already sufficient, no?
Maybe. Right now, cond_resched_rcu_qs() gets a quiescent state to
the RCU core in less than one jiffy, with my other change, this becomes
a handful of jiffies depending on HZ and NR_CPUS. I expect this
increase to a handful of jiffies to be a non-event.
After my upcoming patch, cond_resched() will get a quiescent state to
the RCU core in about ten seconds. While I am am not all that nervous
about the increase from less than a jiffy to a handful of jiffies,
increasing to ten seconds via cond_resched() does make me quite nervous.
Past experience indicates that someone's kernel will likely be fatally
inconvenienced by this magnitude of change.
Or am I misunderstanding what you are proposing?
> In fact, by doing the IPI thing we get the entire cond_resched*()
> family, and we could add the should_resched() guard to
> cond_resched_rcu().
So that cond_resched_rcu_qs() looks something like this, in order
to avoid the function call in the case where the scheduler has nothing
to do?
#define cond_resched_rcu_qs() \
do { \
if (!should_resched(current) || !cond_resched()) \
rcu_note_voluntary_context_switch(current); \
} while (0)
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Donald Buczek <buczek@molgen.mpg.de>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
dvteam@molgen.mpg.de, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Subject: Re: INFO: rcu_sched detected stalls on CPUs/tasks with `kswapd` and `mem_cgroup_shrink_node`
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 08:59:18 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161201165918.GG3924@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161201163614.GL3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 05:36:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 04:40:24AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 06:30:35AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > Sure, we all dislike IPIs, but I'm thinking this half-way point is
> > > sensible, no point in issuing user visible annoyance if indeed we can
> > > prod things back to life, no?
> > >
> > > Only if we utterly fail to make it respond should we bug the user with
> > > our failure..
> >
> > Sold! ;-)
> >
> > I will put together a patch later today.
> >
> > My intent is to hold off on the "upgrade cond_resched()" patch, one
> > step at a time. Longer term, I do very much like the idea of having
> > cond_resched() do both scheduling and RCU quiescent states, assuming
> > that this avoids performance pitfalls.
>
> Well, with the above change cond_resched() is already sufficient, no?
Maybe. Right now, cond_resched_rcu_qs() gets a quiescent state to
the RCU core in less than one jiffy, with my other change, this becomes
a handful of jiffies depending on HZ and NR_CPUS. I expect this
increase to a handful of jiffies to be a non-event.
After my upcoming patch, cond_resched() will get a quiescent state to
the RCU core in about ten seconds. While I am am not all that nervous
about the increase from less than a jiffy to a handful of jiffies,
increasing to ten seconds via cond_resched() does make me quite nervous.
Past experience indicates that someone's kernel will likely be fatally
inconvenienced by this magnitude of change.
Or am I misunderstanding what you are proposing?
> In fact, by doing the IPI thing we get the entire cond_resched*()
> family, and we could add the should_resched() guard to
> cond_resched_rcu().
So that cond_resched_rcu_qs() looks something like this, in order
to avoid the function call in the case where the scheduler has nothing
to do?
#define cond_resched_rcu_qs() \
do { \
if (!should_resched(current) || !cond_resched()) \
rcu_note_voluntary_context_switch(current); \
} while (0)
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-01 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <24c226a5-1a4a-173e-8b4e-5107a2baac04@molgen.mpg.de>
2016-11-08 12:22 ` INFO: rcu_sched detected stalls on CPUs/tasks with `kswapd` and `mem_cgroup_shrink_node` Paul Menzel
2016-11-08 17:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-08 17:38 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-08 18:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-16 17:01 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-16 17:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-21 13:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-21 14:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-21 14:18 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-21 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-21 15:35 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-24 10:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-24 18:50 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-27 9:37 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-27 5:32 ` Christopher S. Aker
2016-11-27 9:19 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-28 11:04 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-28 12:26 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-28 12:26 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-30 10:28 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-30 10:28 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-30 11:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 11:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 11:43 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-30 11:43 ` Donald Buczek
2016-12-02 9:14 ` Donald Buczek
2016-12-02 9:14 ` Donald Buczek
2016-12-06 8:32 ` Donald Buczek
2016-12-06 8:32 ` Donald Buczek
2016-11-30 11:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 11:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 11:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 11:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 12:31 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-30 12:31 ` Paul Menzel
2016-11-30 14:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 14:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 13:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 13:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-30 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-30 17:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 17:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 17:05 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 17:05 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 17:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 17:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 17:34 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 17:34 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 17:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-30 17:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-30 19:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 19:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 5:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 5:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 12:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 12:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 16:59 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2016-12-01 16:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 18:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 18:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 18:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 18:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 18:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 18:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] <d6981bac-8e97-b482-98c0-40949db03ca3@kernelpanic.ru>
[not found] ` <20161124133019.GE3612@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <de88a72a-f861-b51f-9fb3-4265378702f1@kernelpanic.ru>
[not found] ` <20161125212000.GI31360@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <20161128095825.GI14788@dhcp22.suse.cz>
[not found] ` <20161128105425.GY31360@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <3a4242cb-0198-0a3b-97ae-536fb5ff83ec@kernelpanic.ru>
[not found] ` <20161128143435.GC3924@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2016-11-28 14:40 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-11-28 15:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-28 19:16 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-11-29 18:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 17:41 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-11-30 17:48 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 18:12 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-11-30 18:25 ` Michal Hocko
2016-11-30 18:26 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-12-01 18:10 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-12-01 19:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-01 19:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 9:37 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-02 9:37 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-02 13:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 13:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 16:39 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-12-02 16:39 ` Boris Zhmurov
2016-12-02 16:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 16:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 17:02 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-02 17:02 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-02 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-02 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-30 19:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20161201165918.GG3924@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=buczek@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=dvteam@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.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.