Re: [PATCH RFC 6/9] RCU priority boosting for preemptible RCU

[Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>]

On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 08:24:21AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 11:39:01AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Return the list from which to boost target tasks.
> > > + * May only be invoked by the booster task, so guaranteed to
> > > + * already be initialized.  Use rcu_boost_dat element least recently
> > > + * the destination for task blocking in RCU read-side critical sections.
> > > + */
> > > +static inline struct rcu_boost_dat *rcu_rbd_boosting(int cpu)
> > > +{
> > > +	int idx = (rcu_boost_idx + 1) & (RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS - 1);
> >
> > Why is this masking required? When we increment
> > the rcu_boost_idx in rcu_booster, we do perform a modulo operation
> > to ensure that it wraps around RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS.
> 
> Because we are not masking rcu_boost_idx, we are masking
>  (rcu_boost_idx + 1) which may extend the bounderies of
> RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS.

Thanks! 

But I'm still trying to understand why the (increment + masking)
is required at all.

The thread(producer) that requires boosting is added to the element
with index rcu_boost_idx.

The booster thread(consumer) increments the rcu_boost_idx to 
(rcu_boost_idx + 1) % RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS, before it fetches the least
recently used rcu_boot_dat elements and boost the eligible tasks queued
in that element.

So, can't we just return per_cpu(rcu_boost_dat, cpu)[rcu_boost_idx] from
rcu_rbd_boosting(cpu) ? Isn't that already the least recently used
element?

> 
> -- Steve

Thanks and Regards
gautham.
-- 
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
"Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!"