From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: add random preemption
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:43:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100621164306.GC2354@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C1F2986.7080006@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 04:57:42PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> Add random preemption to help we to torture the preemptable rcu.
>
> srcu_read_delay() also calls rcu_read_delay() for shorter delays.
I do like the change to srcu_read_delay(), good to fall back to the
normal rcu_read_delay() behavior when a long delay is not selected.
The change to rcu_read_delay() looks promising as well, but please see
below for some comments on the other change.
And the big question: did you find any failures when testing with this
change? ;-)
Thanx, Paul
> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcutorture.c
> index 2e2726d..7c81d07 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutorture.c
> @@ -303,6 +303,10 @@ static void rcu_read_delay(struct rcu_random_state *rrsp)
> mdelay(longdelay_ms);
> if (!(rcu_random(rrsp) % (nrealreaders * 2 * shortdelay_us)))
> udelay(shortdelay_us);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
> + if (!preempt_count() && !(rcu_random(rrsp) % (nrealreaders * 20000)))
> + preempt_schedule();
> +#endif
This one scared me for a bit -- then I realized that preempt_schedule()
won't actually schedule if preemption is in any way disabled. So the
above really is OK, because Classic RCU and RCU-bh disable preemption.
So, should we have a comment to this effect, or is my hypersensitivity to
RCU semantics unique to me?
> }
>
> static void rcu_torture_read_unlock(int idx) __releases(RCU)
> @@ -536,6 +540,8 @@ static void srcu_read_delay(struct rcu_random_state *rrsp)
> delay = rcu_random(rrsp) % (nrealreaders * 2 * longdelay * uspertick);
> if (!delay)
> schedule_timeout_interruptible(longdelay);
> + else
> + rcu_read_delay(rrsp);
> }
>
> static void srcu_torture_read_unlock(int idx) __releases(&srcu_ctl)
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-21 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-21 8:57 [PATCH] rcutorture: add random preemption Lai Jiangshan
2010-06-21 16:43 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-06-21 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-21 17:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-21 17:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20100621164306.GC2354@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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