From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [RFC] jiffies_till_first_fqs off by 1
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 21:06:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251224020619.GA1297269@joelbox2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f95e414-7d0e-4e2a-9656-25abf84c27ec@paulmck-laptop>
Hi Paul,
On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 03:53:23PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 12:38:19PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > During studying some synchronize_rcu() latencies, I found that the
> > jiffies_till_first_fqs value passed to the timer tick subsystem does is always
> > off by one. This is natural due to calc_index() rounding up.
> >
> > For example, jiffies_till_first_fqs=3 means the "Jiffies till first FQS" delay
> > is actually 4ms. And same for the next FQS. In fact, in testing it shows it can
> > never ever be 3ms for HZ=1000. And in rare cases, it will go to 5ms probably due
> > to interrupts.
> >
> > Considering this, I think it is better to reduce the jiffies_till_first_fqs by 1
> > before passing it to the wait APIs.
> >
> > But before I wanted to send a patch, I wanted to get everyone's thoughts.
> > Considering this the RFC.
>
> Inadvertent passing of the value zero?
This should not be an issue because at the moment, even a value of
jiffies_till_first_fqs == 0 waits for ~1 jiffie due to schedule_timeout(0).
But you raise a good point, we should cap the minimum allowed jiffie value
for the fqs parameters to 1 so that we don't pass schedule_timeout() with
negative values when/if we do the reduce-by-one approach.
thanks,
- Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-24 2:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-23 17:38 [RFC] jiffies_till_first_fqs off by 1 Joel Fernandes
2025-12-23 23:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-12-24 2:06 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2025-12-25 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-12-26 2:15 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-01 22:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-01-02 2:59 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-02 3:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-01-02 17:58 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-02 19:50 ` 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=20251224020619.GA1297269@joelbox2 \
--to=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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.