From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: ego@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>, Ted Tso <tytso@us.ibm.com>,
dvhltc@us.ibm.com, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
bunk@kernel.org, Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:39:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080301193903.GC15887@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802291330590.2723@scrub.home>
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 01:38:15PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > Why got this moved into init/Kconfig?
> >
> > Because there are some arches that don't have kernel/Kconfig.preempt,
> > its earlier home. Therefore, putting it into kernel/Kconfig.preempt
> > broke those arches' builds by supplying neither PREEMPT_RCU nor
> > CLASSIC_RCU.
> >
> > > Now it's somewhere in the root menu, not really belonging to anything.
> >
> > Do you have a suggested location?
> >
> > > Also why is this a choice? Are more RCU types planned?
> >
> > I don't expect additional drop-in replacements for RCU, though people
> > are certainly free to experiment if they wish. It is a choice because
> > this gives people a very clear idea of the two options and because
> > it makes the implementation a bit cleaner.
>
> I'd suggest to move PREEMPT_RCU back to Kconfig.preempt and if you really
> need the second symbol leave this behind (maybe with a comment):
>
> config CLASSIC_RCU
> def_bool !PREEMPT_RCU
>
> Once there are more options, we can still look for a better place...
>
> Also could you please add a proper dependency to RCU_TRACE on PREEMPT_RCU,
> so that this condition isn't needed anymore:
>
> ifeq ($(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU),y)
> obj-$(CONFIG_RCU_TRACE) += rcupreempt_trace.o
> endif
Is this what you had in mind? I don't have any way to test on a
system not supporting CONFIG_PREEMPT, but seems to work on x86.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
init/Kconfig | 34 +++-------------------------------
kernel/Kconfig.preempt | 15 +++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.25-rc3/init/Kconfig linux-2.6.25-rc3-preempt_rcu/init/Kconfig
--- linux-2.6.25-rc3/init/Kconfig 2008-02-26 16:58:42.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc3-preempt_rcu/init/Kconfig 2008-03-01 11:30:59.000000000 -0800
@@ -860,38 +860,10 @@ source "block/Kconfig"
config PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS
bool
-choice
- prompt "RCU implementation type:"
- default CLASSIC_RCU
- help
- This allows you to choose either the classic RCU implementation
- that is designed for best read-side performance on non-realtime
- systems, or the preemptible RCU implementation for best latency
- on realtime systems. Note that some kernel preemption modes
- will restrict your choice.
-
- Select the default if you are unsure.
-
config CLASSIC_RCU
- bool "Classic RCU"
+ def_bool !PREEMPT_RCU
help
This option selects the classic RCU implementation that is
designed for best read-side performance on non-realtime
- systems.
-
- Say Y if you are unsure.
-
-config PREEMPT_RCU
- bool "Preemptible RCU"
- depends on PREEMPT
- help
- This option reduces the latency of the kernel by making certain
- RCU sections preemptible. Normally RCU code is non-preemptible, if
- this option is selected then read-only RCU sections become
- preemptible. This helps latency, but may expose bugs due to
- now-naive assumptions about each RCU read-side critical section
- remaining on a given CPU through its execution.
-
- Say N if you are unsure.
-
-endchoice
+ systems. Classic RCU is the default. Note that the
+ PREEMPT_RCU symbol is used to select/deselect this option.
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.25-rc3/kernel/Kconfig.preempt linux-2.6.25-rc3-preempt_rcu/kernel/Kconfig.preempt
--- linux-2.6.25-rc3/kernel/Kconfig.preempt 2008-02-26 16:58:42.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc3-preempt_rcu/kernel/Kconfig.preempt 2008-03-01 11:35:39.000000000 -0800
@@ -52,8 +52,23 @@ config PREEMPT
endchoice
+config PREEMPT_RCU
+ bool "Preemptible RCU"
+ depends on PREEMPT
+ default n
+ help
+ This option reduces the latency of the kernel by making certain
+ RCU sections preemptible. Normally RCU code is non-preemptible, if
+ this option is selected then read-only RCU sections become
+ preemptible. This helps latency, but may expose bugs due to
+ now-naive assumptions about each RCU read-side critical section
+ remaining on a given CPU through its execution.
+
+ Say N if you are unsure.
+
config RCU_TRACE
bool "Enable tracing for RCU - currently stats in debugfs"
+ depends on PREEMPT_RCU
select DEBUG_FS
default y
help
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-01 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-13 17:03 [RFC PATCH 0/6] RCU: Preemptible-RCU Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 17:14 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] Preempt-RCU: Use softirq instead of tasklets for RCU Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 17:15 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] Preempt-RCU: Reorganize RCU code into rcuclassic.c and rcupdate.c Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-14 14:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2007-12-14 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-12-13 17:16 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] Preempt-RCU: Fix rcu_barrier for preemptive environment Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 17:16 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation Gautham R Shenoy
2008-02-29 4:34 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 4:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-02-29 12:38 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 13:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-01 19:39 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2008-03-01 21:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-02 3:09 ` Roman Zippel
2008-03-02 3:06 ` Roman Zippel
2008-03-03 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-03-04 20:22 ` [PATCH] move PREEMPT_RCU config option back under PREEMPT Paul E. McKenney
2008-03-04 20:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-05 0:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-03-05 2:06 ` Roman Zippel
2008-03-05 19:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-03-04 20:49 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] Preempt-RCU: Implementation Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 13:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-02-29 14:31 ` Roman Zippel
2007-12-13 17:17 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] Preempt-RCU: CPU Hotplug handling Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 17:18 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] Preempt-RCU: Update RCU Documentation Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 20:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-13 21:06 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] RCU: Preemptible-RCU Steven Rostedt
2007-12-13 20:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-13 20:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-12-13 21:09 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-12-13 20:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-13 23:41 ` 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=20080301193903.GC15887@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=josh@freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@us.ibm.com \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/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