From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
sbw@mit.edu, patches@linaro.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/14] rcu: Make rcu_accelerate_cbs() note need for future grace periods
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 09:49:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1357408144-15830-14-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1357408144-15830-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Now that rcu_start_future_gp() has been abstracted from
rcu_nocb_wait_gp(), rcu_accelerate_cbs() can invoke rcu_start_future_gp()
so as to register the need for any future grace periods needed by a
CPU about to enter dyntick-idle mode. This commit makes this change.
Note that some refactoring of rcu_start_gp() is carried out to avoid
recursion and subsequent self-deadlocks.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/rcutree.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index bd42feb..f7399b4 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -230,7 +230,8 @@ static ulong jiffies_till_next_fqs = RCU_JIFFIES_TILL_FORCE_QS;
module_param(jiffies_till_first_fqs, ulong, 0644);
module_param(jiffies_till_next_fqs, ulong, 0644);
-static void rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp);
+static void rcu_start_gp_advanced(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
+ struct rcu_data *rdp);
static void force_qs_rnp(struct rcu_state *rsp, int (*f)(struct rcu_data *));
static void force_quiescent_state(struct rcu_state *rsp);
static int rcu_pending(int cpu);
@@ -1200,7 +1201,7 @@ rcu_start_future_gp(struct rcu_node *rnp, struct rcu_data *rdp)
trace_rcu_future_gp(rnp, rdp, c, "Startedleafroot");
} else {
trace_rcu_future_gp(rnp, rdp, c, "Startedroot");
- rcu_start_gp(rdp->rsp);
+ rcu_start_gp_advanced(rdp->rsp, rnp_root, rdp);
}
unlock_out:
if (rnp != rnp_root)
@@ -1286,6 +1287,8 @@ static void rcu_accelerate_cbs(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
rdp->nxttail[i] = rdp->nxttail[RCU_NEXT_TAIL];
rdp->nxtcompleted[i] = c;
}
+ /* Record any needed additional grace periods. */
+ rcu_start_future_gp(rnp, rdp);
/* Trace depending on how much we were able to accelerate. */
if (!*rdp->nxttail[RCU_WAIT_TAIL])
@@ -1647,20 +1650,9 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_gp_kthread(void *arg)
* quiescent state.
*/
static void
-rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp)
+rcu_start_gp_advanced(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
+ struct rcu_data *rdp)
{
- struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda);
- struct rcu_node *rnp = rcu_get_root(rsp);
-
- /*
- * If there is no grace period in progress right now, any
- * callbacks we have up to this point will be satisfied by the
- * next grace period. Also, advancing the callbacks reduces the
- * probability of false positives from cpu_needs_another_gp()
- * resulting in pointless grace periods. So, advance callbacks!
- */
- rcu_advance_cbs(rsp, rnp, rdp);
-
if (!rsp->gp_kthread || !cpu_needs_another_gp(rsp, rdp)) {
/*
* Either we have not yet spawned the grace-period
@@ -1672,14 +1664,36 @@ rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp)
}
rsp->gp_flags = RCU_GP_FLAG_INIT;
- /* Ensure that CPU is aware of completion of last grace period. */
- __rcu_process_gp_end(rsp, rdp->mynode, rdp);
-
/* Wake up rcu_gp_kthread() to start the grace period. */
wake_up(&rsp->gp_wq);
}
/*
+ * Similar to rcu_start_gp_advanced(), but also advance the calling CPU's
+ * callbacks. Note that rcu_start_gp_advanced() cannot do this because it
+ * is invoked indirectly from rcu_advance_cbs(), which would result in
+ * endless recursion -- or would do so if it wasn't for the self-deadlock
+ * that is encountered beforehand.
+ */
+static void
+rcu_start_gp(struct rcu_state *rsp)
+{
+ struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda);
+ struct rcu_node *rnp = rcu_get_root(rsp);
+
+ /*
+ * If there is no grace period in progress right now, any
+ * callbacks we have up to this point will be satisfied by the
+ * next grace period. Also, advancing the callbacks reduces the
+ * probability of false positives from cpu_needs_another_gp()
+ * resulting in pointless grace periods. So, advance callbacks
+ * then start the grace period!
+ */
+ rcu_advance_cbs(rsp, rnp, rdp);
+ rcu_start_gp_advanced(rsp, rnp, rdp);
+}
+
+/*
* Report a full set of quiescent states to the specified rcu_state
* data structure. This involves cleaning up after the prior grace
* period and letting rcu_start_gp() start up the next grace period
--
1.7.8
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-05 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-05 17:48 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/14] RCU idle/no-CB changes for 3.9 Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/14] rcu: Tag callback lists with corresponding grace-period number Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/14] rcu: Trace callback acceleration Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/14] rcu: Remove restrictions on no-CBs CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/14] rcu: Provide compile-time control for " Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-07 16:50 ` Josh Triplett
2013-01-07 22:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/14] rcu: Distinguish "rcuo" kthreads by RCU flavor Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-06 23:34 ` Paul Gortmaker
2013-01-07 20:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-07 16:54 ` Josh Triplett
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/14] rcu: Export RCU_FAST_NO_HZ parameters to sysfs Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/14] rcu: Accelerate RCU callbacks at grace-period end Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/14] rcu: Make RCU_FAST_NO_HZ take advantage of numbered callbacks Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/14] rcu: Rearrange locking in rcu_start_gp() Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:49 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/14] rcu: Repurpose no-CBs event tracing to future-GP events Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:49 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/14] rcu: Push lock release to rcu_start_gp()'s callers Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:49 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/14] rcu: Rename n_nocb_gp_requests to need_future_gp Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:49 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/14] rcu: Abstract rcu_start_future_gp() from rcu_nocb_wait_gp() Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-05 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
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=1357408144-15830-14-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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