From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@amd.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>, rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 04/11] rcu/nocb: Introduce nocb mutex
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 15:45:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240530134552.5467-5-frederic@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240530134552.5467-1-frederic@kernel.org>
The barrier_mutex is used currently to protect (de-)offloading
operations and prevent from nocb_lock locking imbalance in rcu_barrier()
and shrinker, and also from misordered RCU barrier invocation.
Now since RCU (de-)offloading is going to happen on offline CPUs, an RCU
barrier will have to be executed while transitionning from offloaded to
de-offloaded state. And this can't happen while holding the
barrier_mutex.
Introduce a NOCB mutex to protect (de-)offloading transitions. The
barrier_mutex is still held for now when necessary to avoid barrier
callbacks reordering and nocb_lock imbalance.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 3 +++
kernel/rcu/tree.h | 1 +
kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h | 20 ++++++++++++--------
kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 1 +
4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 4cbc4e78a8c5..e904c187c281 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -97,6 +97,9 @@ static struct rcu_state rcu_state = {
.srs_cleanup_work = __WORK_INITIALIZER(rcu_state.srs_cleanup_work,
rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup_work),
.srs_cleanups_pending = ATOMIC_INIT(0),
+#ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU
+ .nocb_mutex = __MUTEX_INITIALIZER(rcu_state.nocb_mutex),
+#endif
};
/* Dump rcu_node combining tree at boot to verify correct setup. */
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
index a297dc89a09c..16e6fe63d93c 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
@@ -421,6 +421,7 @@ struct rcu_state {
atomic_t srs_cleanups_pending; /* srs inflight worker cleanups. */
#ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU
+ struct mutex nocb_mutex; /* Guards (de-)offloading */
int nocb_is_setup; /* nocb is setup from boot */
#endif
};
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
index fdd0616f2fd1..16bcb8b13a5e 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
@@ -1141,6 +1141,7 @@ int rcu_nocb_cpu_deoffload(int cpu)
int ret = 0;
cpus_read_lock();
+ mutex_lock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
mutex_lock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
@@ -1153,6 +1154,7 @@ int rcu_nocb_cpu_deoffload(int cpu)
}
}
mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
cpus_read_unlock();
return ret;
@@ -1228,6 +1230,7 @@ int rcu_nocb_cpu_offload(int cpu)
int ret = 0;
cpus_read_lock();
+ mutex_lock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
mutex_lock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
if (!rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
@@ -1240,6 +1243,7 @@ int rcu_nocb_cpu_offload(int cpu)
}
}
mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
cpus_read_unlock();
return ret;
@@ -1257,7 +1261,7 @@ lazy_rcu_shrink_count(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
return 0;
/* Protect rcu_nocb_mask against concurrent (de-)offloading. */
- if (!mutex_trylock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex))
+ if (!mutex_trylock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex))
return 0;
/* Snapshot count of all CPUs */
@@ -1267,7 +1271,7 @@ lazy_rcu_shrink_count(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
count += READ_ONCE(rdp->lazy_len);
}
- mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
return count ? count : SHRINK_EMPTY;
}
@@ -1285,9 +1289,9 @@ lazy_rcu_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
* Protect against concurrent (de-)offloading. Otherwise nocb locking
* may be ignored or imbalanced.
*/
- if (!mutex_trylock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex)) {
+ if (!mutex_trylock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex)) {
/*
- * But really don't insist if barrier_mutex is contended since we
+ * But really don't insist if nocb_mutex is contended since we
* can't guarantee that it will never engage in a dependency
* chain involving memory allocation. The lock is seldom contended
* anyway.
@@ -1326,7 +1330,7 @@ lazy_rcu_shrink_scan(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
break;
}
- mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
return count ? count : SHRINK_STOP;
}
@@ -1473,15 +1477,15 @@ static void rcu_spawn_cpu_nocb_kthread(int cpu)
* No need to protect against concurrent rcu_barrier()
* because the number of callbacks should be 0 for a non-boot CPU,
* therefore rcu_barrier() shouldn't even try to grab the nocb_lock.
- * But hold barrier_mutex to avoid nocb_lock imbalance from shrinker.
+ * But hold nocb_mutex to avoid nocb_lock imbalance from shrinker.
*/
WARN_ON_ONCE(system_state > SYSTEM_BOOTING && rcu_segcblist_n_cbs(&rdp->cblist));
- mutex_lock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_lock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
rcu_nocb_rdp_deoffload(rdp);
cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, rcu_nocb_mask);
}
- mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
}
/* How many CB CPU IDs per GP kthread? Default of -1 for sqrt(nr_cpu_ids). */
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index 0d6b152a9a17..05239042a08b 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static bool rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(struct rcu_data *rdp)
!(lockdep_is_held(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex) ||
(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) && lockdep_is_cpus_held()) ||
lockdep_is_held(&rdp->nocb_lock) ||
+ lockdep_is_held(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex) ||
(!(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT) && preemptible()) &&
rdp == this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data)) ||
rcu_current_is_nocb_kthread(rdp)),
--
2.45.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-30 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-30 13:45 [PATCH 00/11] rcu/nocb: (De-)offloading on offline CPUs Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 01/11] rcu/nocb: Introduce RCU_NOCB_LOCKDEP_WARN() Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 02/11] rcu/nocb: Move nocb field at the end of state struct Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 03/11] rcu/nocb: Assert no callbacks while nocb kthread allocation fails Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 05/11] rcu/nocb: (De-)offload callbacks on offline CPUs only Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 06/11] rcu/nocb: Remove halfway (de-)offloading handling from bypass Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 07/11] rcu/nocb: Remove halfway (de-)offloading handling from rcu_core()'s QS reporting Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 08/11] rcu/nocb: Remove halfway (de-)offloading handling from rcu_core Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 09/11] rcu/nocb: Remove SEGCBLIST_RCU_CORE Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 10/11] rcu/nocb: Remove SEGCBLIST_KTHREAD_CB Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 13:45 ` [PATCH 11/11] rcu/nocb: Simplify (de-)offloading state machine Frederic Weisbecker
2024-07-02 23:19 ` Boqun Feng
2024-07-03 12:17 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-07-03 22:56 ` [PATCH 11/11 v2] " Frederic Weisbecker
2024-07-03 23:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-07-19 17:30 ` [PATCH 00/11] rcu/nocb: (De-)offloading on offline CPUs 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=20240530134552.5467-5-frederic@kernel.org \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@amd.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
/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.