From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Sai Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/intel_rdt: Update task closid immediately on CPU in rmdir and unmount
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 13:06:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161126210633.GA5415@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1611260947390.3602@nanos>
On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 10:08:57AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 03:23:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > + /*
> > > + * This is safe on x86 w/o barriers as the ordering
> > > + * of writing to task_cpu() and t->on_cpu is
> > > + * reverse to the reading here. The detection is
> > > + * inaccurate as tasks might move or schedule
> > > + * before the smp function call takes place. In
> > > + * such a case the function call is pointless, but
> > > + * there is no other side effect.
> > > + */
> >
> > If process p1 is running on CPU1 before this point,
> >
> > > + if (mask && t->on_cpu)
> > > + cpumask_set_cpu(task_cpu(t), mask);
> >
> > If between CPU1 is set in mask and rdt_update_closid(tmpmask, NULL) is
> > called, p1 is switched to CPU2, and process p2 with its own closid
> > (e.g. 2) is switched to CPU1.
> >
> > Then closid in PQR_ASSOC is set incorrectly as 0 instead of 2 on CPU1.
> > 0 may stay in PQR_ASSOC until next context switch which may take long time
> > in cases of real time or HPC.
> >
> > Don't we need to care this situation? In this situation, the function call
> > is not "pointless" but it's wrong, right?
>
> No.
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> T1 (closid 0) T2 (closid 2)
>
> (t1->on_cpu)
> set(1, mask)
> preemption
> T1 ->CPU2
> switch_to(T3) preemption
> switch_to(idle)
> T2 -> CPU1
> switch_to(T2) switch_to(T1)
> intel_rdt_sched_in() intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid closid = T1->closid
> closid =2 closid = CPU2->closid
>
> rdt_update_closid(mask)
>
> rdt_update_cpu_closid()
> intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid
> closid = 2
>
> IOW, whatever comes first, sched_switch() or function call will update the
> closid to the correct value.
>
> If CPU2 was in the removed group then this looks the following way:
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> T1 (closid 0) T2 (closid 2)
>
> (t1->on_cpu)
> set(1, mask)
> preemption
> T1 ->CPU2
> switch_to(T3) preemption
> switch_to(idle)
> T2 -> CPU1
> switch_to(T2) switch_to(T1)
> intel_rdt_sched_in() intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid closid = T1->closid (0)
> closid =2 closid = CPU2->closid
> closid = 5
> for_each_cpu(grp->mask)
> CPU2->closid = 0
>
> rdt_update_closid(mask)
>
> rdt_update_cpu_closid() rdt_update_cpu_closid()
> intel_rdt_sched_in( intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid closid = T1->closid (0)
> closid = 2 closid = CPU2->closid
> closid = 0
>
> But on CPU2 the function call might be pointless as well in the following
> situation:
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> T1 (closid 0) T2 (closid 2)
>
> (t1->on_cpu)
> set(1, mask)
> preemption
> T1 ->CPU2
> switch_to(T3) preemption
> switch_to(idle)
>
> for_each_cpu(grp->mask)
> CPU2->closid = 0
> T2 -> CPU1
> switch_to(T2) switch_to(T1)
> intel_rdt_sched_in() intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid closid = T1->closid (0)
> closid =2 closid = CPU2->closid
> closid = 0
>
> rdt_update_closid(mask)
>
> rdt_update_cpu_closid() rdt_update_cpu_closid()
> intel_rdt_sched_in( intel_rdt_sched_in()
> closid = T2->closid closid = T1->closid (0)
> closid = 2 closid = CPU2->closid
> closid = 0
>
> The whole thing works by ordering:
>
> 1) Update closids of each task in the group and if a task is running on a
> cpu then mark the CPU on which the task is running for the function
> call.
>
> 2) Update closids of each CPU in the group
>
> 3) Or the cpumasks of the tasks and the groups and invoke the function call
> on all of them
>
> If an affected task does a sched_switch after task->closid is updated and
> before the function call is invoked then the function call is pointless.
>
> If a sched switch happens on a CPU after cpu->closid is updated and before
> the function call is invoked then the function call is pointless.
>
> But there is no case where the function call can result in a wrong value.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Thank you for your clear explanation. You are absolutely correct. I know
I must miss something.
The reworked second patch and the first patch were tested successfully.
I assume you will check them in tip tree and I will not send v2.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-26 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-18 23:18 [PATCH 1/2] x86/intel_rdt: Fix setting of closid when adding CPUs to a group Fenghua Yu
2016-11-18 23:18 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/intel_rdt: Update task closid immediately on CPU in rmdir and unmount Fenghua Yu
2016-11-23 14:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-26 2:36 ` Fenghua Yu
2016-11-26 9:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-26 21:06 ` Fenghua Yu [this message]
2016-11-28 10:17 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Fenghua Yu
2016-11-28 10:16 ` [tip:x86/cache] x86/intel_rdt: Fix setting of closid when adding CPUs to a group tip-bot for Fenghua Yu
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=20161126210633.GA5415@linux.intel.com \
--to=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=h.peter.anvin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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