From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] Use call_rcu_hurry() with synchronize_rcu_mult()
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 09:51:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b18fdfc3-987d-9351-ca6c-5d4cb2d71af1@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <358bde93-4933-4305-ac42-4d6f10c97c08@paulmck-laptop>
On 5/18/23 7:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> The bpf_struct_ops_map_free() function must wait for both an RCU grace
> period and an RCU Tasks grace period, and so it passes call_rcu() and
> call_rcu_tasks() to synchronize_rcu_mult(). This works, but on ChromeOS
> and Android platforms call_rcu() can have lazy semantics, resulting in
> multi-second delays between call_rcu() invocation and invocation of the
> corresponding callback.
>
> Therefore, substitute call_rcu_hurry() for call_rcu().
My understanding on the net-effect is to free up the struct_ops resources faster.
I believe call_rcu() should be fine. struct_ops freeing should not happen very
often. For example, when a bpf written tcp congestion control (struct_ops) is
registered, it will stay in the kernel for a long time. A couple seconds delay
in releasing the struct_ops should be acceptable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-18 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-18 14:47 [PATCH bpf] Use call_rcu_hurry() with synchronize_rcu_mult() Paul E. McKenney
2023-05-18 16:51 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2023-05-18 17:25 ` 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=b18fdfc3-987d-9351-ca6c-5d4cb2d71af1@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.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.