All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@suse.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/27] sched/isolation: Introduce housekeeping per-cpu rwsem
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 07:39:12 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aFmRQLv2RWbqX01b@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3bf95ee2-1340-41b1-9f5c-1563f953c6eb@redhat.com>

Hello,

On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 01:34:58PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 6/20/25 11:22 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > The HK_TYPE_DOMAIN isolation cpumask, and further the
> > HK_TYPE_KERNEL_NOISE cpumask will be made modifiable at runtime in the
> > future.
> > 
> > The affected subsystems will need to synchronize against those cpumask
> > changes so that:
> > 
> > * The reader get a coherent snapshot
> > * The housekeeping subsystem can safely propagate a cpumask update to
> >    the susbsytems after it has been published.
> > 
> > Protect against readsides that can sleep with per-cpu rwsem. Updates are
> > expected to be very rare given that CPU isolation is a niche usecase and
> > related cpuset setup happen only in preparation work. On the other hand
> > read sides can occur in more frequent paths.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
> 
> Thanks for the patch series and it certainly has some good ideas. However I
> am a bit concern about the overhead of using percpu-rwsem for
> synchronization especially when the readers have to wait for the completion
> on the writer side. From my point of view, during the transition period when
> new isolated CPUs are being added or old ones being removed, the reader will
> either get the old CPU data or the new one depending on the exact timing.
> The effect the CPU selection may persist for a while after the end of the
> critical section.
> 
> Can we just rely on RCU to make sure that it either get the new one or the
> old one but nothing in between without the additional overhead?

So, I had a similar thought - ie. does this need full interlocking so that
when the modification operation can wait for existing users to drain? It'd
be nice to explain that part a bit more. That said, percpu_rwsem read path
is pretty cheap, so if that is a requirement, I doubt the overhead
difference between RCU access and percpu read locking would make meaningful
difference.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-23 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-20 15:22 [PATCH 00/27] cpuset/isolation: Honour kthreads preferred affinity Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 01/27] sched/isolation: Remove housekeeping static key Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 02/27] sched/isolation: Introduce housekeeping per-cpu rwsem Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-23 17:34   ` Waiman Long
2025-06-23 17:39     ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2025-06-23 17:57       ` Waiman Long
2025-06-23 18:03         ` Tejun Heo
2025-06-25 14:30           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-25 12:18     ` Phil Auld
2025-06-25 14:34       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-25 15:50         ` Phil Auld
2025-06-27  0:11           ` Waiman Long
2025-06-27  0:48             ` Phil Auld
2025-06-30 12:59               ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-06-25 14:18     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-26 23:58       ` Waiman Long
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 03/27] PCI: Protect against concurrent change of housekeeping cpumask Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 16:17   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-26 14:51     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 04/27] cpu: Protect against concurrent isolated cpuset change Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 05/27] memcg: Prepare to protect " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 19:19   ` Shakeel Butt
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 06/27] mm: vmstat: " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 07/27] sched/isolation: Save boot defined domain flags Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 08/27] cpuset: Convert boot_hk_cpus to use HK_TYPE_DOMAIN_BOOT Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 09/27] driver core: cpu: Convert /sys/devices/system/cpu/isolated " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 10/27] net: Keep ignoring isolated cpuset change Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 11/27] block: Protect against concurrent " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:59   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-06-26 15:03     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-23  5:46   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-26 15:33     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 12/27] cpu: Provide lockdep check for CPU hotplug lock write-held Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 13/27] cpuset: Provide lockdep check for cpuset lock held Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 14/27] sched/isolation: Convert housekeeping cpumasks to rcu pointers Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 15/27] cpuset: Update HK_TYPE_DOMAIN cpumask from cpuset Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 16/27] sched/isolation: Flush memcg workqueues on cpuset isolated partition change Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 19:30   ` Shakeel Butt
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 17/27] sched/isolation: Flush vmstat " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:22 ` [PATCH 18/27] cpuset: Propagate cpuset isolation update to workqueue through housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 19/27] cpuset: Remove cpuset_cpu_is_isolated() Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 20/27] sched/isolation: Remove HK_TYPE_TICK test from cpu_is_isolated() Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 21/27] kthread: Refine naming of affinity related fields Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 22/27] kthread: Include unbound kthreads in the managed affinity list Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 23/27] kthread: Include kthreadd to " Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 24/27] kthread: Rely on HK_TYPE_DOMAIN for preferred affinity management Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 25/27] sched: Switch the fallback task allowed cpumask to HK_TYPE_DOMAIN Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 26/27] kthread: Honour kthreads preferred affinity after cpuset changes Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 15:23 ` [PATCH 27/27] kthread: Comment on the purpose and placement of kthread_affine_node() call Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-20 16:08 ` [PATCH 00/27] cpuset/isolation: Honour kthreads preferred affinity Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-26 14:57   ` Frederic Weisbecker

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=aFmRQLv2RWbqX01b@slm.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llong@redhat.com \
    --cc=marco.crivellari@suse.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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.