public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: riel@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Untested patch to recheck idle state for expedited grace periods
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 09:15:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161011161540.GA32060@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161011132849.GA21962@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 06:28:49AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello, Rik,
> 
> And it turns out that I did not in fact do the recheck at IPI time.
> The (untested) patch below is an alleged fix.  Thoughts?

And it passes modest rcutorture testing, for whatever that might be
worth.

							Thanx, Paul

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> commit e53e0b3e7b3c783962f9461bcb9aa8bc3e3a8688
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date:   Tue Oct 11 06:09:59 2016 -0700
> 
>     rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state
>     
>     Expedited grace periods check dyntick-idle state, and avoid sending
>     IPIs to idle CPUs, including those running guest OSes, and, on NOHZ_FULL
>     kernels, nohz_full CPUs.  However, the kernel has been observed checking
>     a CPU while it was non-idle, but sending the IPI after it has gone
>     idle.  This commit therefore rechecks idle state immediately before
>     sending the IPI, refraining from IPIing CPUs that have since gone idle.
>     
>     Reported-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> index e99a5234d9ed..fe98dd24adf8 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> @@ -404,6 +404,7 @@ struct rcu_data {
>  	atomic_long_t exp_workdone1;	/* # done by others #1. */
>  	atomic_long_t exp_workdone2;	/* # done by others #2. */
>  	atomic_long_t exp_workdone3;	/* # done by others #3. */
> +	int exp_dynticks_snap;		/* Double-check need for IPI. */
>  
>  	/* 7) Callback offloading. */
>  #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> index 24343eb87b58..d3053e99fdb6 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> @@ -358,8 +358,10 @@ static void sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus(struct rcu_state *rsp,
>  			struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda, cpu);
>  			struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp = &per_cpu(rcu_dynticks, cpu);
>  
> +			rdp->exp_dynticks_snap =
> +				atomic_add_return(0, &rdtp->dynticks);
>  			if (raw_smp_processor_id() == cpu ||
> -			    !(atomic_add_return(0, &rdtp->dynticks) & 0x1) ||
> +			    !(rdp->exp_dynticks_snap & 0x1) ||
>  			    !(rnp->qsmaskinitnext & rdp->grpmask))
>  				mask_ofl_test |= rdp->grpmask;
>  		}
> @@ -377,9 +379,17 @@ static void sync_rcu_exp_select_cpus(struct rcu_state *rsp,
>  		/* IPI the remaining CPUs for expedited quiescent state. */
>  		for_each_leaf_node_possible_cpu(rnp, cpu) {
>  			unsigned long mask = leaf_node_cpu_bit(rnp, cpu);
> +			struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda, cpu);
> +			struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp = &per_cpu(rcu_dynticks, cpu);
> +
>  			if (!(mask_ofl_ipi & mask))
>  				continue;
>  retry_ipi:
> +			if (atomic_add_return(0, &rdtp->dynticks) !=
> +			    rdp->exp_dynticks_snap) {
> +				mask_ofl_test |= mask;
> +				continue;
> +			}
>  			ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu, func, rsp, 0);
>  			if (!ret) {
>  				mask_ofl_ipi &= ~mask;

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-11 16:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-11 13:28 Untested patch to recheck idle state for expedited grace periods Paul E. McKenney
2016-10-11 16:15 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2016-10-25 17:39   ` 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=20161011161540.GA32060@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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