From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 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,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 11/11] rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:50:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110223165043.GA2529@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1298425183-21265-11-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:39:40PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Drop to non-real-time priority and yield, but only after posting a
> + * timer that will cause us to regain our real-time priority if we
> + * remain preempted. Either way, we restore our real-time priority
> + * before returning.
> + */
> +static void rcu_yield(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_sched_state.rda, cpu);
> + struct sched_param sp;
> + struct timer_list yield_timer;
> +
> + setup_timer(&yield_timer, rcu_cpu_kthread_timer, (unsigned long)rdp);
> + mod_timer(&yield_timer, jiffies + 2);
> + sp.sched_priority = 0;
> + sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_NORMAL, &sp);
> + schedule();
> + sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> + sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_FIFO, &sp);
> + del_timer(&yield_timer);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Handle cases where the rcu_cpu_kthread() ends up on the wrong CPU.
> + * This can happen while the corresponding CPU is either coming online
> + * or going offline. We cannot wait until the CPU is fully online
> + * before starting the kthread, because the various notifier functions
> + * can wait for RCU grace periods. So we park rcu_cpu_kthread() until
> + * the corresponding CPU is online.
> + *
> + * Return 1 if the kthread needs to stop, 0 otherwise.
> + *
> + * Caller must disable bh. This function can momentarily enable it.
> + */
> +static int rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop(int cpu)
> +{
> + while (cpu_is_offline(cpu) || smp_processor_id() != cpu) {
> + if (kthread_should_stop())
> + return 1;
> + local_bh_enable();
> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
Why is it uninterruptible? Well that doesn't change much anyway.
It can be a problem for long time sleeping kernel threads because of
the hung task detector, but certainly not for 1 jiffy.
> + if (smp_processor_id() != cpu)
> + set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(cpu));
> + local_bh_disable();
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Per-CPU kernel thread that invokes RCU callbacks. This replaces the
> + * earlier RCU softirq.
> + */
> +static int rcu_cpu_kthread(void *arg)
> +{
> + int cpu = (int)(long)arg;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int spincnt = 0;
> + wait_queue_head_t *wqp = &per_cpu(rcu_cpu_wq, cpu);
> + char work;
> + char *workp = &per_cpu(rcu_cpu_has_work, cpu);
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + wait_event_interruptible(*wqp,
> + *workp != 0 || kthread_should_stop());
> + local_bh_disable();
> + if (rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop(cpu)) {
> + local_bh_enable();
> + break;
> + }
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + work = *workp;
> + *workp = 0;
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> + if (work)
> + rcu_process_callbacks();
> + local_bh_enable();
> + if (*workp != 0)
> + spincnt++;
> + else
> + spincnt = 0;
> + if (spincnt > 10) {
> + rcu_yield(cpu);
> + spincnt = 0;
> + }
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Per-rcu_node kthread, which is in charge of waking up the per-CPU
> + * kthreads when needed.
> + */
> +static int rcu_node_kthread(void *arg)
> +{
> + int cpu;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + unsigned long mask;
> + struct rcu_node *rnp = (struct rcu_node *)arg;
> + struct sched_param sp;
> + struct task_struct *t;
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + wait_event_interruptible(rnp->node_wq, rnp->wakemask != 0 ||
> + kthread_should_stop());
> + if (kthread_should_stop())
> + break;
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp->lock, flags);
> + mask = rnp->wakemask;
> + rnp->wakemask = 0;
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
> + for (cpu = rnp->grplo; cpu <= rnp->grphi; cpu++, mask <<= 1) {
> + if ((mask & 0x1) == 0)
> + continue;
> + preempt_disable();
> + per_cpu(rcu_cpu_has_work, cpu) = 1;
> + t = per_cpu(rcu_cpu_kthread_task, cpu);
> + if (t == NULL) {
> + preempt_enable();
> + continue;
> + }
> + sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> + sched_setscheduler_nocheck(t, cpu, &sp);
> + wake_up_process(t);
My (mis?)understanding of the picture is this node kthread is there to
wake up cpu threads that called rcu_yield(). But actually rcu_yield()
doesn't make the cpu thread sleeping, instead it switches to SCHED_NORMAL,
to avoid starving the system with callbacks.
So I wonder if this wake_up_process() is actually relevant.
sched_setscheduler_nocheck() already handles the per sched policy rq migration
and the process is not sleeping.
That said, by the time the process may have gone to sleep, because if no other
SCHED_NORMAL task was there, it has just continued and may have flushed
every callbacks. So this wake_up_process() may actually wake up the task
but it will sleep again right away due to the condition in wait_event_interruptible()
of the cpu thread.
Right?
> + preempt_enable();
> + }
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-23 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 81+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-23 1:39 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/14] Preview of RCU patches for 2.6.39 Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 01/11] rcu: call __rcu_read_unlock() in exit_rcu for tiny RCU Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-25 8:29 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-25 19:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-03-24 3:45 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-03-24 13:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-03-25 2:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 02/11] rcutorture: Get rid of duplicate sched.h include Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 03/11] rcu: add documentation saying which RCU flavor to choose Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 04/11] rcupdate: remove dead code Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 14:36 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 05/11] rcu: add comment saying why DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD depends on PREEMPT Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 3:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 13:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP615CB0BE0A2623EF62925096DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 14:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 14:37 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 14:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 15:02 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 15:13 ` [PATCH] debug rcu head support !PREEMPT config Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP1519908E0ACAEE1384F71896DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 15:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 15:37 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP42770DC9BDE561B962274096DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 18:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 18:40 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP900C4ABCF4001FBCB1594696DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 06/11] smp: Document transitivity for memory barriers Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 3:29 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 6:21 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-23 15:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 07/11] rcu: Remove conditional compilation for RCU CPU stall warnings Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 08/11] rcu: Decrease memory-barrier usage based on semi-formal proof Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 09/11] rcu: merge TREE_PREEPT_RCU blocked_tasks[] lists Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 10/11] rcu: Update documentation to reflect blocked_tasks[] merge Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 11/11] rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 2:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-02-23 15:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 3:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-02-23 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 14:02 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP211F39903EDACD9B7E025C96DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 14:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 16:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-02-23 16:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 17:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 17:14 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP5642728A153E83B94895F896DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 17:30 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP65F733B8D1D704C7EA1F8796DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 17:34 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 18:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 18:29 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 18:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 19:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 19:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-23 19:35 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-23 19:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 20:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 19:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 19:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 20:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 18:38 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 18:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-02-23 19:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 19:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-02-23 19:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 16:50 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2011-02-23 19:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 19:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-02-23 20:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP57EE20F30B92B8763FD2FE96DB0@phx.gbl>
2011-02-23 18:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-25 8:17 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-25 20:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-28 3:29 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-28 9:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-01 0:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-03-01 14:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-02 0:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-03-02 22:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-28 23:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-03-02 1:52 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 12/14] rcu: priority boosting for TREE_PREEMPT_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 13/14] rcu: eliminate unused boosting statistics Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 1:39 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 14/14] rcu: Add boosting to TREE_PREEMPT_RCU tracing Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 3:07 ` Lai Jiangshan
2011-02-23 16:31 ` 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=20110223165043.GA2529@nowhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.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=eric.dumazet@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=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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