linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: tj@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com
Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
	mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, namhyung@kernel.org,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, sbw@mit.edu,
	amit.kucheria@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, rjw@sisk.pl,
	wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com, xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs for "light" atomic readers to prevent CPU offline
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 01:44:15 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50BFAB17.3090603@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50BF999C.6030707@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

> Replaying what Tejun wrote:
> 
> Hello, Oleg.
> 
>> Replaying what Oleg wrote:
>>> Replacing get_online_cpus() w/ percpu_rwsem is great but this thread
>>> is about replacing preempt_disable with something finer grained and
>>> less heavy on the writer side
>>
>> If only I understood why preempt_disable() is bad ;-)
>>
>> OK, I guess "less heavy on the writer side" is the hint, and in the
>> previous email you mentioned that "stop_machine() itself is extremely
>> heavy".
>>
>> Looks like, you are going to remove stop_machine() from cpu_down ???
>>
> 
> Yeah, that's what Srivatsa is trying to do.  The problem seems to be
> that cpu up/down is very frequent on certain mobile platforms for
> power management and as currently implemented cpu hotplug is too heavy
> and latency-inducing.
>   
>>> The problem seems that we don't have percpu_rwlock yet.  It shouldn't
>>> be too difficult to implement, right?
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I am not sure... unless you simply copy-and-paste the lglock code
>> and replace spinlock_t with rwlock_t.
>>
> 
> Ah... right, so that's where brlock ended up.  So, lglock is the new
> thing and brlock is a wrapper around it.
> 
>> We probably want something more efficient, but I bet we can't avoid
>> the barriers on the read side.
>>
>> And somehow we should avoid the livelocks. Say, we can't simply add
>> the per_cpu_reader_counter, _read_lock should spin if the writer is
>> active. But at the same time _read_lock should be recursive.
>>
> 
> I think we should just go with lglock.  It does involve local atomic
> ops but atomic ops themselves aren't that expensive and it's not like
> we can avoid memory barriers.  Also, that's the non-sleeping
> counterpart of percpu_rwsem.  If it's not good enough for some reason,
> we should improve it rather than introducing something else.
> 

While working on the v2 yesterday, I had actually used rwlocks for
the light readers and atomic ops for the full-readers. (Later I changed
both to rwlocks while posting this v2). Anyway, the atomic ops version
looked something like shown below.

I'll take a look at lglocks and see if that helps in our case.

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat


---

 include/linux/cpu.h |    4 ++
 kernel/cpu.c        |   98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 102 insertions(+)


diff --git a/include/linux/cpu.h b/include/linux/cpu.h
index c64b6ed..5011c7d 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpu.h
@@ -177,6 +177,8 @@ extern void get_online_cpus(void);
 extern void put_online_cpus(void);
 extern void get_online_cpus_stable_atomic(void);
 extern void put_online_cpus_stable_atomic(void);
+extern void get_online_cpus_atomic(void);
+extern void put_online_cpus_atomic(void);
 #define hotcpu_notifier(fn, pri)	cpu_notifier(fn, pri)
 #define register_hotcpu_notifier(nb)	register_cpu_notifier(nb)
 #define unregister_hotcpu_notifier(nb)	unregister_cpu_notifier(nb)
@@ -202,6 +204,8 @@ static inline void cpu_hotplug_driver_unlock(void)
 #define put_online_cpus()	do { } while (0)
 #define get_online_cpus_stable_atomic()	do { } while (0)
 #define put_online_cpus_stable_atomic()	do { } while (0)
+#define get_online_cpus_atomic()	do { } while (0)
+#define put_online_cpus_atomic()	do { } while (0)
 #define hotcpu_notifier(fn, pri)	do { (void)(fn); } while (0)
 /* These aren't inline functions due to a GCC bug. */
 #define register_hotcpu_notifier(nb)	({ (void)(nb); 0; })
diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index 8c9eecc..76b07f7 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
 #include <linux/gfp.h>
 #include <linux/suspend.h>
+#include <linux/atomic.h>
 
 #include "smpboot.h"
 
@@ -104,6 +105,58 @@ void put_online_cpus_stable_atomic(void)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(put_online_cpus_stable_atomic);
 
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(atomic_t, atomic_reader_refcount);
+
+#define writer_active(v)	((v) < 0)
+#define reader_active(v)	((v) > 0)
+
+/*
+ * Invoked by hotplug reader, to prevent CPUs from going offline.
+ * Increments its per-cpu 'atomic_reader_refcount' to mark itself as being
+ * active.
+ *
+ * If 'atomic_reader_refcount' is negative, it means that a CPU offline
+ * operation is in progress (hotplug writer). Wait for it to complete
+ * and then mark your presence (increment the count) and return.
+ *
+ * You can call this recursively, because it doesn't hold any locks.
+ *
+ * Returns with preemption disabled.
+ */
+void get_online_cpus_atomic(void)
+{
+	int c, old;
+
+	preempt_disable();
+	read_lock(&hotplug_rwlock);
+
+	for (;;) {
+		c = atomic_read(&__get_cpu_var(atomic_reader_refcount));
+		if (unlikely(writer_active(c))) {
+			cpu_relax();
+			continue;
+		}
+
+		old = atomic_cmpxchg(&__get_cpu_var(atomic_reader_refcount),
+				     c, c + 1);
+
+		if (likely(old == c))
+			break;
+
+		c = old;
+	}
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_online_cpus_atomic);
+
+void put_online_cpus_atomic(void)
+{
+	atomic_dec(&__get_cpu_var(atomic_reader_refcount));
+	smp_mb__after_atomic_dec();
+	read_unlock(&hotplug_rwlock);
+	preempt_enable();
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(put_online_cpus_atomic);
+
 static struct {
 	struct task_struct *active_writer;
 	struct mutex lock; /* Synchronizes accesses to refcount, */
@@ -292,6 +345,42 @@ static inline void check_for_tasks(int cpu)
 	write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Invoked by hotplug writer, in preparation to take a CPU offline.
+ * Decrements the per-cpu 'atomic_reader_refcount' to mark itself as being
+ * active.
+ *
+ * If 'atomic_reader_refcount' is positive, it means that there are active
+ * hotplug readers (those that prevent hot-unplug). Wait for them to complete
+ * and then mark your presence (decrement the count) and return.
+ */
+static void disable_atomic_reader(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+	int c, old;
+
+	for (;;) {
+		c = atomic_read(&per_cpu(atomic_reader_refcount, cpu));
+		if (likely(reader_active(c))) {
+			cpu_relax();
+			continue;
+		}
+
+		old = atomic_cmpxchg(&per_cpu(atomic_reader_refcount, cpu),
+				     c, c - 1);
+
+		if (likely(old == c))
+			break;
+
+		c = old;
+	}
+}
+
+static void enable_atomic_reader(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+	atomic_inc(&per_cpu(atomic_reader_refcount, cpu));
+	smp_mb__after_atomic_inc();
+}
+
 struct take_cpu_down_param {
 	unsigned long mod;
 	void *hcpu;
@@ -302,6 +391,7 @@ static int __ref take_cpu_down(void *_param)
 {
 	struct take_cpu_down_param *param = _param;
 	unsigned long flags;
+	unsigned int cpu;
 	int err;
 
 	/*
@@ -317,6 +407,10 @@ static int __ref take_cpu_down(void *_param)
 		return err;
 	}
 
+	/* Disable the atomic hotplug readers who need full synchronization */
+	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
+		disable_atomic_reader(cpu);
+
 	/*
 	 * We have successfully removed the CPU from the cpu_online_mask.
 	 * So release the lock, so that the light-weight atomic readers (who care
@@ -330,6 +424,10 @@ static int __ref take_cpu_down(void *_param)
 
 	cpu_notify(CPU_DYING | param->mod, param->hcpu);
 
+	/* Enable the atomic hotplug readers who need full synchronization */
+	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
+		enable_atomic_reader(cpu);
+
 	local_irq_restore(flags);
 	return 0;
 }


  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-05 20:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-05 18:42 [RFC PATCH v2 00/10][RESEND] CPU hotplug: stop_machine()-free CPU hotplug Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs for "light" atomic readers to prevent CPU offline Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:47   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:51     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:53       ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:56         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:59           ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 20:14             ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2012-12-06 16:18               ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-06 18:48                 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-06 19:17                   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-07 21:01                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-06 19:28                   ` Steven Rostedt
2012-12-06 19:36                     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-06 22:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
2012-12-07 17:33                         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
     [not found]                     ` <20121207200014.GB13238@redhat.com>
2012-12-10 18:21                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-10 19:07                         ` Steven Rostedt
2012-12-07 19:56                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-07 20:25                     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-07 20:59                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-05 19:07   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-05 19:16     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/10] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs for "full" " Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 19:01   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 20:31     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 20:57       ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06  4:31         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/10] CPU hotplug: Convert preprocessor macros to static inline functions Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/10] smp, cpu hotplug: Fix smp_call_function_*() to prevent CPU offline properly Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/10] smp, cpu hotplug: Fix on_each_cpu_*() " Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/10] sched, cpu hotplug: Use stable online cpus in try_to_wake_up() & select_task_rq() Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/10] kick_process(), cpu-hotplug: Prevent offlining of target CPU properly Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/10] yield_to(), cpu-hotplug: Prevent offlining of other CPUs properly Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/10] kvm, vmx: Add full atomic synchronization with CPU Hotplug Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 18:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/10] cpu: No more __stop_machine() in _cpu_down() Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-12-05 19:08   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-05 19:12     ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
     [not found] <20121205131038.17383.55472.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com>
     [not found] ` <20121205131136.17383.23318.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com>
     [not found]   ` <20121205142316.GI3885@mtj.dyndns.org>
     [not found]     ` <20121205164640.GA7382@redhat.com>
     [not found]       ` <20121205165356.GL3885@mtj.dyndns.org>
2012-12-05 18:32         ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs for "light" atomic readers to prevent CPU offline Srivatsa S. Bhat

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=50BFAB17.3090603@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=amit.kucheria@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=sbw@mit.edu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).