public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com,
	Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 04/21] x86: Avoid RCU warnings on slave CPUs
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 10:34:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120920173419.GH2449@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120906112739.13320.53090.stgit@kvmdev>

On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 08:27:40PM +0900, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote:
> Initialize rcu related variables to avoid warnings about RCU usage while
> slave CPUs is running specified functions. Also notify RCU subsystem before
> the slave CPU is entered into idle state.

Hello, Tomoki,

A few questions and comments interspersed below.

							Thanx, Paul

> Signed-off-by: Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com>
> Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
> Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> ---
> 
>  arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c |    4 ++++
>  kernel/rcutree.c          |   14 ++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> index e8cfe377..45dfc1d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> @@ -382,6 +382,8 @@ notrace static void __cpuinit start_slave_cpu(void *unused)
>  		f = per_cpu(slave_cpu_func, cpu);
>  		per_cpu(slave_cpu_func, cpu).func = NULL;
> 
> +		rcu_note_context_switch(cpu);
> +

Why not use rcu_idle_enter() and rcu_idle_exit()?  These would tell
RCU to ignore the slave CPU for the duration of its idle period.
The way you have it, if a slave CPU stayed idle for too long, you
would get RCU CPU stall warnings, and possibly system hangs as well.

Or is this being called from some task that is not the idle task?
If so, you instead want the new rcu_user_enter() and rcu_user_exit()
that are hopefully on their way into 3.7.  Or maybe better, use a real
idle task, so that idle_task(smp_processor_id()) returns true and RCU
stops complaining.  ;-)

Note that CPUs that RCU believes to be idle are not permitted to contain
RCU read-side critical sections, which in turn means no entering the
scheduler, no sleeping, and so on.  There is an RCU_NONIDLE() macro
to tell RCU to pay attention to the CPU only for the duration of the
statement passed to RCU_NONIDLE, and there are also an _rcuidle variant
of the tracing statement to allow tracing from idle.

>  		if (!f.func) {
>  			native_safe_halt();
>  			continue;
> @@ -1005,6 +1007,8 @@ int __cpuinit slave_cpu_up(unsigned int cpu)
>  	if (IS_ERR(idle))
>  		return PTR_ERR(idle);
> 
> +	slave_cpu_notify(CPU_SLAVE_UP_PREPARE, cpu);
> +
>  	ret = __native_cpu_up(cpu, idle, 1);
> 
>  	cpu_maps_update_done();
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index f280e54..31a7c8c 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -2589,6 +2589,9 @@ static int __cpuinit rcu_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
>  	switch (action) {
>  	case CPU_UP_PREPARE:
>  	case CPU_UP_PREPARE_FROZEN:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SLAVE_CPU
> +	case CPU_SLAVE_UP_PREPARE:
> +#endif

Why do you need #ifdef here?  Why not define CPU_SLAVE_UP_PREPARE
unconditionally?  Then if CONFIG_SLAVE_CPU=n, rcu_cpu_notify() would
never be invoked with CPU_SLAVE_UP_PREPARE, so no problems.

>  		rcu_prepare_cpu(cpu);
>  		rcu_prepare_kthreads(cpu);
>  		break;
> @@ -2603,6 +2606,9 @@ static int __cpuinit rcu_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
>  		break;
>  	case CPU_DYING:
>  	case CPU_DYING_FROZEN:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SLAVE_CPU
> +	case CPU_SLAVE_DYING:
> +#endif

Same here.

>  		/*
>  		 * The whole machine is "stopped" except this CPU, so we can
>  		 * touch any data without introducing corruption. We send the
> @@ -2616,6 +2622,9 @@ static int __cpuinit rcu_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
>  	case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN:
>  	case CPU_UP_CANCELED:
>  	case CPU_UP_CANCELED_FROZEN:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SLAVE_CPU
> +	case CPU_SLAVE_DEAD:
> +#endif

And here.

>  		for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp)
>  			rcu_cleanup_dead_cpu(cpu, rsp);
>  		break;
> @@ -2797,6 +2806,10 @@ static void __init rcu_init_geometry(void)
>  	rcu_num_nodes -= n;
>  }
> 
> +static struct notifier_block __cpuinitdata rcu_slave_nb = {
> +	.notifier_call = rcu_cpu_notify,
> +};
> +
>  void __init rcu_init(void)
>  {
>  	int cpu;
> @@ -2814,6 +2827,7 @@ void __init rcu_init(void)
>  	 * or the scheduler are operational.
>  	 */
>  	cpu_notifier(rcu_cpu_notify, 0);
> +	register_slave_cpu_notifier(&rcu_slave_nb);
>  	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
>  		rcu_cpu_notify(NULL, CPU_UP_PREPARE, (void *)(long)cpu);
>  	check_cpu_stall_init();
> 
> 
> --
> 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/
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-20 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-06 11:27 [RFC v2 PATCH 00/21] KVM: x86: CPU isolation and direct interrupts delivery to guests Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 01/21] x86: Split memory hotplug function from cpu_up() as cpu_memory_up() Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:31   ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-06 11:32     ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 02/21] x86: Add a facility to use offlined CPUs as slave CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 03/21] x86: Support hrtimer on " Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 04/21] x86: Avoid RCU warnings " Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-20 17:34   ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-09-28  8:10     ` Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 05/21] KVM: Enable/Disable virtualization on slave CPUs are activated/dying Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 06/21] KVM: Add facility to run guests on slave CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:27 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 07/21] KVM: handle page faults of slave guests on online CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 08/21] KVM: Add KVM_GET_SLAVE_CPU and KVM_SET_SLAVE_CPU to vCPU ioctl Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 09/21] KVM: Go back to online CPU on VM exit by external interrupt Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 10/21] KVM: proxy slab operations for slave CPUs on online CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 11/21] KVM: no exiting from guest when slave CPU halted Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 12/21] x86/apic: Enable external interrupt routing to slave CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 13/21] x86/apic: IRQ vector remapping on slave for " Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 14/21] KVM: Directly handle interrupts by guests without VM EXIT on " Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 15/21] KVM: add tracepoint on enabling/disabling direct interrupt delivery Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 16/21] KVM: vmx: Add definitions PIN_BASED_PREEMPTION_TIMER Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 17/21] KVM: add kvm_arch_vcpu_prevent_run to prevent VM ENTER when NMI is received Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 18/21] KVM: route assigned devices' MSI/MSI-X directly to guests on slave CPUs Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:28 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 19/21] KVM: Enable direct EOI for directly routed interrupts to guests Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:29 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 20/21] KVM: Pass-through local APIC timer of on slave CPUs to guest VM Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:29 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 21/21] x86: request TLB flush to slave CPU using NMI Tomoki Sekiyama
2012-09-06 11:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 00/21] KVM: x86: CPU isolation and direct interrupts delivery to guests Avi Kivity
2012-09-07  8:26 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-09-10 11:36   ` Tomoki Sekiyama

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=20120920173419.GH2449@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tomoki.sekiyama.qu@hitachi.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com \
    /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