All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.21 03/16] sched: Implement push_task_to_cpu (v2)
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:09:49 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <704369944.814.1539788989963.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181017065145.GA7111@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

----- On Oct 17, 2018, at 2:51 AM, Srikar Dronamraju srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:

> Hi Mathieu,
> 
>> +int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int dest_cpu)
>> +{
> 
> In your use case, is the task going to be current?
> If yes, we should simply be using migrate_task_to.
> 
>> +	struct rq_flags rf;
>> +	struct rq *rq;
>> +	int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +	rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
>> +	update_rq_clock(rq);
>> +
>> +	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(dest_cpu, &p->cpus_allowed)) {
>> +		ret = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
> 
> Ideally we should have checked cpus_allowed/cpu_active_mask before taking
> the lock. This would help reduce the contention on the rqlock when the
> passed parameter is not correct.
> 
>> +
>> +	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(dest_cpu, cpu_active_mask)) {
>> +		ret = -EBUSY;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (task_cpu(p) == dest_cpu)
>> +		goto out;
> 
> Same as above.
> 
>> +
>> +	if (task_running(rq, p) || p->state == TASK_WAKING) {
> 
> Why are we using migration thread to move a task in TASK_WAKING state?
> 
>> +		struct migration_arg arg = { p, dest_cpu };
>> +		/* Need help from migration thread: drop lock and wait. */
>> +		task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
>> +		stop_one_cpu(cpu_of(rq), migration_cpu_stop, &arg);
>> +		tlb_migrate_finish(p->mm);
>> +		return 0;
> 
> Why cant we use migrate_task_to instead?

I could do that be moving migrate_task_to outside of NUMA-specific #ifdef,
but I think we can do much, much simpler than that, see below.

> 
>> +	} else if (task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> index 455fa330de04..27ad25780204 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> @@ -1340,6 +1340,15 @@ static inline void __set_task_cpu(struct task_struct *p,
>> unsigned int cpu)
>>  #endif
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>> +int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int dest_cpu);
>> +#else
>> +static inline int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int
>> dest_cpu)
>> +{
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
> 
> Your usecase is outside kernel/sched. So I am not sure if this is the right
> place for the declaration.

Actually, now that I think of it, we may not need to migrate the task at all.
Now that cpu_opv implementation takes a temporary vmap() of the user-space pages,
we can touch that virtual address range from interrupt context from another CPU.

So cpu_opv can simply execute the vector of operations in IPI context rather than
do all this silly dance with migration.

Thoughts ?

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.21 03/16] sched: Implement push_task_to_cpu (v2)
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:09:49 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <704369944.814.1539788989963.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181017065145.GA7111@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

----- On Oct 17, 2018, at 2:51 AM, Srikar Dronamraju srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:

> Hi Mathieu,
> 
>> +int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int dest_cpu)
>> +{
> 
> In your use case, is the task going to be current?
> If yes, we should simply be using migrate_task_to.
> 
>> +	struct rq_flags rf;
>> +	struct rq *rq;
>> +	int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +	rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
>> +	update_rq_clock(rq);
>> +
>> +	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(dest_cpu, &p->cpus_allowed)) {
>> +		ret = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
> 
> Ideally we should have checked cpus_allowed/cpu_active_mask before taking
> the lock. This would help reduce the contention on the rqlock when the
> passed parameter is not correct.
> 
>> +
>> +	if (!cpumask_test_cpu(dest_cpu, cpu_active_mask)) {
>> +		ret = -EBUSY;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (task_cpu(p) == dest_cpu)
>> +		goto out;
> 
> Same as above.
> 
>> +
>> +	if (task_running(rq, p) || p->state == TASK_WAKING) {
> 
> Why are we using migration thread to move a task in TASK_WAKING state?
> 
>> +		struct migration_arg arg = { p, dest_cpu };
>> +		/* Need help from migration thread: drop lock and wait. */
>> +		task_rq_unlock(rq, p, &rf);
>> +		stop_one_cpu(cpu_of(rq), migration_cpu_stop, &arg);
>> +		tlb_migrate_finish(p->mm);
>> +		return 0;
> 
> Why cant we use migrate_task_to instead?

I could do that be moving migrate_task_to outside of NUMA-specific #ifdef,
but I think we can do much, much simpler than that, see below.

> 
>> +	} else if (task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> index 455fa330de04..27ad25780204 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
>> @@ -1340,6 +1340,15 @@ static inline void __set_task_cpu(struct task_struct *p,
>> unsigned int cpu)
>>  #endif
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>> +int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int dest_cpu);
>> +#else
>> +static inline int push_task_to_cpu(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int
>> dest_cpu)
>> +{
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
> 
> Your usecase is outside kernel/sched. So I am not sure if this is the right
> place for the declaration.

Actually, now that I think of it, we may not need to migrate the task at all.
Now that cpu_opv implementation takes a temporary vmap() of the user-space pages,
we can touch that virtual address range from interrupt context from another CPU.

So cpu_opv can simply execute the vector of operations in IPI context rather than
do all this silly dance with migration.

Thoughts ?

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-17 15:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-10 19:19 [RFC PATCH for 4.21 00/16] rseq updates, new cpu_opv system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 01/16] rseq/selftests: Add reference counter to coexist with glibc Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 10:37   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 10:37     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 15:13     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 15:13       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 16:20       ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 16:20         ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 16:37         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 16:37           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 17:04           ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 17:04             ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-11 19:42             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-11 19:42               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-12  9:59               ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-12  9:59                 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-10-23 14:59                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-23 14:59                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 02/16] rseq/selftests: Adapt number of threads to the number of detected cpus Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 03/16] sched: Implement push_task_to_cpu (v2) Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17  6:51   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-10-17  6:51     ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-10-17 15:09     ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2018-10-17 15:09       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 04/16] mm: Introduce vm_map_user_ram, vm_unmap_user_ram Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-16 18:30   ` Steven Rostedt
2018-10-16 18:30     ` Steven Rostedt
2018-10-16 19:21     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-16 19:21       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-16 19:40       ` Steven Rostedt
2018-10-16 19:40         ` Steven Rostedt
2018-10-17  0:27     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-17  0:27       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-17 15:00       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 15:00         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 15:04         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 15:04           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 15:34           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-17 15:34             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 05/16] mm: Provide is_vma_noncached Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 06/16] cpu_opv: Provide cpu_opv system call (v8) Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-16  8:10   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-16  8:10     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-16 19:17     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-16 19:17       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17  1:46       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-17  1:46         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-10-17  7:19   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-10-17  7:19     ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-10-17 15:11     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 15:11       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 16:09       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-17 16:09         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 07/16] cpu_opv: limit amount of virtual address space used by cpu_opv Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 08/16] x86: Wire up cpu_opv system call Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 09/16] powerpc: " Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 10/16] arm: " Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 11/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide cpu-op library Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 12/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide basic test Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 13/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide percpu_op API Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 14/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide basic percpu ops test Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 15/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide parametrized tests Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19 ` [RFC PATCH for 4.21 16/16] cpu-opv/selftests: Provide Makefile, scripts, gitignore Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-10-10 19:19   ` mathieu.desnoyers

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=704369944.814.1539788989963.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=bmaurer@fb.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.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.