From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755291Ab1H3P1o (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:27:44 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:34750 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755033Ab1H3P1n convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:27:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/32] nohz: Move rcu dynticks idle mode handling to idle enter/exit APIs From: Peter Zijlstra To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton , Anton Blanchard , Avi Kivity , Ingo Molnar , Lai Jiangshan , "Paul E . McKenney" , Stephen Hemminger , Thomas Gleixner , Tim Pepper , Paul Menage Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:26:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20110830143207.GP9748@somewhere.redhat.com> References: <1313423549-27093-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1313423549-27093-6-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1314627922.2816.65.camel@twins> <20110829171155.GD9748@somewhere.redhat.com> <1314640155.2816.117.camel@twins> <20110829175954.GF9748@somewhere.redhat.com> <1314641160.2816.128.camel@twins> <20110829233521.GK9748@somewhere.redhat.com> <1314703315.2799.5.camel@twins> <20110830143207.GP9748@somewhere.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1314717993.5812.11.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 16:32 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 01:21:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 01:35 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > That means it has to be in an extended grace period when we stop the > > > > tick. > > > > > > You mean extended quiescent state? > > > > Yeah that :-) > > > > > As a summary here is what we do: > > > > > > - if we are in the kernel, we can't run into extended quiescent state because > > > we may make use of rcu anytime there. But if we run nohz we don't have the tick > > > to notice quiescent states to the RCU machinery and help completing grace periods > > > so as soon as we receive an rcu IPI from another CPU (due to the grace period > > > beeing extended because our nohz CPU doesn't report quiescent states), we restart > > > the tick. We are optimistic enough to consider that we may avoid a lot of ticks > > > even if there are some risks to be disturbed in some random rates. > > > So even with the IPI we consider it as an upside. > > > > > > - if we are in userspace we can run in extended quiescent state. > > > > But you can only disable the tick/enter extended quiescent state while > > in kernel-space. Thus the second clause is precluded from ever being > > true. > > No, we have a specific stacking in the irq: > > rcu_irq_enter() > > disable tick... > if (user) > rcu_enter_nohz(); > > rcu_irq_exit() <-- extended quiescent state entry effective only there > > And by the time we call rcu_irq_exit() and we resume to userspace, we are > not supposed to have rcu read side critical section (minus the case of > a signal with do_notify_resume() which I have yet to handle). See all that is still kernelspace ;-) I think I know what you mean to say though, but seeing as you note there is even now a known shortcoming I'm not very confident its a solid construction. What will help us find such holes? I would much rather we not rely on such fragile things too much.. this RCU stuff wants way more thought, as it stands your patch-set doesn't do anything useful IMO.