public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 20:13:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110223191333.GD2591@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110223190601.GT2163@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:06:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 05:50:46PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Yep, and the next patch does in fact change this to
> schedule_timeout_interruptible().
> 
> Good eyes, though!
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul

Ok.

Don't forget what I wrote below ;)


> 
> > > +		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;
> > > +}

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-23 19:15 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
2011-02-23 19:06     ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-02-23 19:13       ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
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=20110223191333.GD2591@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