From: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu] Do not keep timekeeping CPU tick running for non-nohz_full= CPUs
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 10:19:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140719171954.GA610@thin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140719165350.GA18411@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 09:53:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> If a non-nohz_full= CPU is non-idle, it will have a scheduling-clock
> interrupt, and therefore doesn't need the timekeeping CPU to keep
> its scheduling-clock interrupt going. This commit therefore ignores
> the idle state of non-nohz_full CPUs when determining whether or not
> the timekeeping CPU can safely turn off its scheduling-clock interrupt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> index ddad959a9132..eaa32e4c228d 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> @@ -2789,8 +2789,13 @@ static void rcu_sysidle_exit(struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp, int irq)
> * system-idle state. This means that the timekeeping CPU must
> * invoke rcu_sysidle_force_exit() directly if it does anything
> * more than take a scheduling-clock interrupt.
> + *
> + * In addition if we are not a nohz_full= CPU, then when we are
> + * non-idle we have our own tick, so we don't need the timekeeping
> + * CPU to keep a tick on our behalf. We assume that the timekeeping
> + * CPU is also a nohz_full= CPU.
> */
> - if (smp_processor_id() == tick_do_timer_cpu)
> + if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(smp_processor_id()))
> return;
>
> /* Update system-idle state: We are clearly no longer fully idle! */
> @@ -2810,11 +2815,11 @@ static void rcu_sysidle_check_cpu(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool *isidle,
>
> /*
> * If some other CPU has already reported non-idle, if this is
> - * not the flavor of RCU that tracks sysidle state, or if this
> - * is an offline or the timekeeping CPU, nothing to do.
> + * not the flavor of RCU that tracks sysidle state, or if this is
> + * an offline or !nohz_full= or the timekeeping CPU, nothing to do.
> */
> if (!*isidle || rdp->rsp != rcu_sysidle_state ||
> - cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu) || rdp->cpu == tick_do_timer_cpu)
> + cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu) || !tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu))
> return;
> if (rcu_gp_in_progress(rdp->rsp))
> WARN_ON_ONCE(smp_processor_id() != tick_do_timer_cpu);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-19 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-19 16:53 [PATCH tip/core/rcu] Do not keep timekeeping CPU tick running for non-nohz_full= CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-19 17:19 ` Josh Triplett [this message]
2014-07-19 18:01 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-19 18:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-20 0:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-20 11:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-20 20:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-21 15:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-21 17:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-21 17:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-23 16:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-23 16:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-23 16:50 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-23 15:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-20 22:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-21 15:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-07-23 16:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-24 4:24 ` Mike Galbraith
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=20140719171954.GA610@thin \
--to=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--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