From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
sbw@mit.edu
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/15] v3 RCU idle/no-CB changes for 3.10
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:36:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130318213608.GA20296@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
Hello!
This series contains changes to RCU_FAST_NO_HZ idle entry/exit and also
removes restrictions on no-CBs CPUs.
1. Remove restrictions on no-CBs CPUs.
2. Allow some control of no-CBs CPUs at kernel-build time. The option
of most interest is probably the one that makes -all- CPUs be
no-CBs CPUs.
3. Introduce proper blocking to grace-period waits for no-CBs CPUs.
4. Add event tracing for no-CBs CPU callback registration.
5. Add event tracing for no-CBs CPU grace periods.
6. Distinguish the no-CBs kthreads for the various RCU flavors.
Without this patch, CPU 0 would have up to three kthreads all
named "rcuo0", which is less than optimal. These kthreads
are now named "rcuob/0", "rcuop/0", and "rcuos/0".
7. Export RCU_FAST_NO_HZ parameters to sysfs to allow run-time
adjustment.
8. Re-introduce callback acceleration during grace-period cleanup.
Now that the callbacks are associated with specific grace periods,
such acceleration is idempotent, and it is now safe to accelerate
more than needed. (In contrast, in the past, too-frequent callback
acceleration resulted in infrequent RCU failures.)
9. Use the newly numbered callbacks to greatly reduce the CPU overhead
incurred at idle entry by RCU_FAST_NO_HZ. The fact that the
callbacks are now numbered means that instead of repeatedly
cranking the RCU state machine to try to get all callbacks
invoked, we can instead rely on the numbering so that the CPU
can take full advantage of any grace periods that elapse while
it is asleep. CPUs with callbacks still have limited sleep times,
especially if they have at least one non-lazy callback queued.
10-15. Allow CPUs to make known their need for future grace periods,
which is also used to reduce the need for frenetic RCU
state-machine cranking upon RCU_FAST_NO_HZ entry to idle.
10. Move the release of the root rcu_node structure's ->lock
to then end of rcu_start_gp().
11. Repurpose no-CB's grace-period event tracing to that of
future grace periods, which share no-CB's grace-period
mechanism.
12. Move the release of the root rcu_node structure's ->lock
to rcu_start_gp()'s callers.
13. Rename the rcu_node ->n_nocb_gp_requests field to
->need_future_gp.
14. Abstract rcu_start_future_gp() from rcu_nocb_wait_gp()
to that RCU_FAST_NO_HZ can use the no-CB CPUs mechanism
for allowing a CPU to record its need for future grace
periods.
15. Make rcu_accelerate_cbs() note the need for future
grace periods, thus avoiding delays in starting grace
periods that currently happen due to the CPUs needing
those grace periods being out of action when the previous
grace period ends.
Changes since v2:
o Broke initial patch into smaller pieces.
o Significant additional testing completed.
Changes since v1:
o Fixed a deadlock in #1 spotted by Xie ChanglongX.
o Updated #2 to bring the abbreviations in line with conventional
per-CPU kthread naming.
o Moved the first two patches into their own group.
Thanx, Paul
b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 35 -
b/include/linux/rcupdate.h | 1
b/include/trace/events/rcu.h | 71 ++
b/init/Kconfig | 71 ++
b/kernel/rcutree.c | 279 +++++++---
b/kernel/rcutree.h | 43 -
b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 935 +++++++++++++---------------------
b/kernel/rcutree_trace.c | 2
8 files changed, 756 insertions(+), 681 deletions(-)
next reply other threads:[~2013-03-18 21:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-18 21:36 Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/15] rcu: Remove restrictions on no-CBs CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/15] rcu: Provide compile-time control for " Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/15] rcu: Introduce proper blocking to no-CBs kthreads GP waits Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/15] rcu: Add event tracing for no-CBs CPUs' callback registration Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/15] rcu: Add event tracing for no-CBs CPUs' grace periods Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/15] rcu: Distinguish "rcuo" kthreads by RCU flavor Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/15] rcu: Export RCU_FAST_NO_HZ parameters to sysfs Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/15] rcu: Accelerate RCU callbacks at grace-period end Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/15] rcu: Make RCU_FAST_NO_HZ take advantage of numbered callbacks Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/15] rcu: Rearrange locking in rcu_start_gp() Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/15] rcu: Repurpose no-CBs event tracing to future-GP events Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/15] rcu: Push lock release to rcu_start_gp()'s callers Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/15] rcu: Rename n_nocb_gp_requests to need_future_gp Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/15] rcu: Abstract rcu_start_future_gp() from rcu_nocb_wait_gp() Paul E. McKenney
2013-03-18 21:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/15] rcu: Make rcu_accelerate_cbs() note need for future grace periods 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=20130318213608.GA20296@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.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=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--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