From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CADAC54EE9 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:14:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231706AbiI0POV (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:14:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56826 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230202AbiI0POU (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:14:20 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf36.google.com (mail-qv1-xf36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f36]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D25841251A0 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf36.google.com with SMTP id c15so1072226qvp.7 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:14:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=jbmPaXjwsVDY1AN/HRtWM1ofxdcO2XSj8Vv58jSa1+U=; b=HeQBREf2pKuUYgS4eZIcHY8BNuj31cGuPueOiQUEHmUMRmz1K/eQOieKIDnMrFM6Gv zb9bF1NNPsnO7jhA9+Jb1/BmSK3lGWsV2jhv7js/c8fcOJZ9xIPgBs/eQjgaGuF/w6T0 mwlV4fA6Q3CL6nd5UClqCcS2AwIPtrQT0Cad8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=jbmPaXjwsVDY1AN/HRtWM1ofxdcO2XSj8Vv58jSa1+U=; b=18DfBMtu24DJMDh/lYWtIlG/oKb8X8PDA6MtzyVdhOvrRgPkFQAL1/Zo/wd9Uy1XpK h2dFQrGXYkAUTMWVTHBZ+EFjBKsRxAOf91oPhwD0ij/ZG3Nd0x3/BG0FGIu/yFbajehA FnJIydxDtCgPxqfSC4ZQ2QoBABeL9eu+4c6Ba/9OMLRmkOQUssbtwA2GShLNaO0aulsA Z/VhnoGC4s+sHe2SaI8sS7HZSroAMlPj5El3AfgNMmF0BPCXeHZ35C4JfgHS6cMF2hKq DyQGKfEqgPJtnTfJSEs+I8YfiPMTYWbKNlFcby6FDQRZ+ZYoM4gac3n+0AeNHkwYU/lX jgJA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2t43lgJR8MF3qKIX1b1ffZTIAFsZ9lMILCpLqwSmguI6flp8WQ S6/geth+0KDZaDlBJFtmBJuzYg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5qFpL6YVYNNOcjFaiePEUxR+p5LZkevzl6LVx2pIMIsxWABx/5VMEnMVA7XW7hljToBvef6g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2629:b0:4ad:88cb:66ac with SMTP id gv9-20020a056214262900b004ad88cb66acmr17341441qvb.87.1664291655354; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (48.230.85.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.85.230.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id dt39-20020a05620a47a700b006bbd2c4cccfsm1159084qkb.53.2022.09.27.08.14.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:14:14 +0000 From: Joel Fernandes To: Uladzislau Rezki Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rushikesh.s.kadam@intel.com, neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com, frederic@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] rcu: Make call_rcu() lazy to save power Message-ID: References: <20220922220104.2446868-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20220922220104.2446868-2-joel@joelfernandes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: rcu@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 04:59:44PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: [...] > > > systemd-udevd-642 [050] ..... 17.349832: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.349834: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-675 [012] ..... 17.349835: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-675 [012] ..... 17.349853: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-642 [050] ..... 17.349861: __call_rcu_common: -> 0x0: __dentry_kill+0x140/0x180 <- 0x2 > > > systemd-udevd-675 [012] ..... 17.349873: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.349879: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.350007: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.350011: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.350080: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.350175: __call_rcu_common: -> ____fput+0x0/0x10: task_work_run+0x5c/0x90 <- 0x0 > > > systemd-udevd-665 [061] ..... 17.350362: dev_change_name: --> renamed from eth0 > > > > > > > > > First delay: > > > > > > > > > systemd-udevd-645 [053] ..... 2.339024: __call_rcu_common: -> 0x0: __dentry_kill+0x140/0x180 <- 0x2 > > > kworker/0:3-546 [000] d..1. 6.329516: __call_rcu_common: -> 0x0: queue_rcu_work+0x2b/0x40 <- 0xffff8c70effe40a0 > > > > > > > > > __dentry_kill() function and after 4 seconds there is another one queue_rcu_work(). > > > I have checked the __dentry_kill() if it can do any sync talk with RCU but from the > > > first glance i do not see anything critical. But more attention is required. > > > > Can you log rcu_barrier() as well? It could be that the print is just a side > > effect of something else that is not being printed. > > > It has nothing to do with rcu_barrier() in my case. Also i have checked > the synchronize_rcu() it also works as expected, i.e. it is not a > blocking reason. > > Have you tried my config? Yes I am in the process of trying it. thanks, - Joel