All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk,
	davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
	oleg@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 6/6] rcu/tree: Use irq_work_queue_remote()
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:15:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201028201554.GE3249@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201028200243.GJ2651@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:02:43PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 03:54:28PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 12:07:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > AFAICT we only need/use irq_work_queue_on() on remote CPUs, since we
> > > can directly access local state.  So avoid the IRQ_WORK dependency and
> > > use the unconditionally available irq_work_queue_remote().
> > > 
> > > This survives a number of TREE01 runs.
> > 
> > OK, Paul mentioned on IRC that while it is extremely unlikely, this code
> > does not indeed guarantee it will not try to IPI self.
> > 
> > I'll try again.
> 
> This is the best I could come up with.. :/
> 
> ---
> Subject: rcu/tree: Use irq_work_queue_remote()
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Date: Wed Oct 28 11:53:40 CET 2020
> 
> All sites that consume rcu_iw_gp_seq seem to have rcu_node lock held,
> so setting it probably should too. Also the effect of self-IPI here
> would be setting rcu_iw_gp_seq to the value we just set it to
> (pointless) and clearing rcu_iw_pending, which we just set, so don't
> set it.
> 
> Passes TREE01.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree.c |   10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -1308,14 +1308,16 @@ static int rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(stru
>  			resched_cpu(rdp->cpu);
>  			WRITE_ONCE(rdp->last_fqs_resched, jiffies);
>  		}
> -#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_WORK
> +		raw_spin_lock_rcu_node(rnp);

The caller of rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs() already holds this lock.
Please see the force_qs_rnp() function and its second call site,
to which rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs() is passed as an argument.

But other than that, this does look plausible.  And getting rid of
that #ifdef is worth something.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

>  		if (!rdp->rcu_iw_pending && rdp->rcu_iw_gp_seq != rnp->gp_seq &&
>  		    (rnp->ffmask & rdp->grpmask)) {
> -			rdp->rcu_iw_pending = true;
>  			rdp->rcu_iw_gp_seq = rnp->gp_seq;
> -			irq_work_queue_on(&rdp->rcu_iw, rdp->cpu);
> +			if (likely(rdp->cpu != smp_processor_id())) {
> +				rdp->rcu_iw_pending = true;
> +				irq_work_queue_remote(rdp->cpu, &rdp->rcu_iw);
> +			}
>  		}
> -#endif
> +		raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rnp);
>  	}
>  
>  	return 0;

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-28 22:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-28 11:07 [PATCH v3 0/6] smp: irq_work / smp_call_function rework Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] irq_work: Cleanup Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 13:01   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] smp: Cleanup smp_call_function*() Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 13:25   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] irq_work: Optimize irq_work_single() Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 12:06   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] irq_work: Unconditionally build on SMP Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 13:34   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 14:52     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] irq_work: Provide irq_work_queue_remote() Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 13:40   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 14:38     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 14:53     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 14:56       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-28 11:07 ` [RFC][PATCH v3 6/6] rcu/tree: Use irq_work_queue_remote() Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 14:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 20:02     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 20:15       ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2020-10-29  9:10         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-29 16:04           ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-10-29 16:14             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-29  9:15         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-29 16:06           ` 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=20201028201554.GE3249@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
    --to=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=will@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 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.