From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC srcu] Expedite srcu_schedule_cbs_snp() callback invocation
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:50:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170418175025.GX3956@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5b683054-084a-fae7-0bc6-8db28f0860c3@arm.com>
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:43:05PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 18/04/17 18:33, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Although Tree SRCU does reduce delays when there is at least one
> > synchronize_srcu_expedited() invocation pending, srcu_schedule_cbs_snp()
> > still waits for SRCU_INTERVAL before invoking callbacks. Since
> > synchronize_srcu_expedited() now posts a callback and waits for
> > that callback to do a wakeup, this destroys the expedited nature of
> > synchronize_srcu_expedited().
> >
> > This commit therefore invokes callbacks immediately at the end of the
> > grace period when there is at least one synchronize_srcu_expedited()
> > invocation pending.
> >
> > Reported-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > index 1e54f91c2ff7..744ffdb79d23 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > @@ -447,7 +447,8 @@ static void srcu_schedule_cbs_snp(struct srcu_struct *sp, struct srcu_node *snp)
> > int cpu;
> >
> > for (cpu = snp->grplo; cpu <= snp->grphi; cpu++)
> > - srcu_schedule_cbs_sdp(per_cpu_ptr(sp->sda, cpu), SRCU_INTERVAL);
> > + srcu_schedule_cbs_sdp(per_cpu_ptr(sp->sda, cpu),
> > + atomic_read(&sp->srcu_exp_cnt) ? 0 : SRCU_INTERVAL);
> > }
> >
> > /*
>
> This fixes the issue I was observing, where UEFI in a KVM guest would
> take a x8 slowdown while it messes with some NOR flash emulation on
> arm64 (don't ask, this is horrible...). Anyway:
>
> Tested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>
> Thanks again Paul!
Thank you for your bug-finding and testing efforts! I will be pushing
this into the upcoming merge window.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit 6eec94fe40e294b04d32c8ef552e28fa6159bdad
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue Apr 18 10:28:31 2017 -0700
srcu: Expedite srcu_schedule_cbs_snp() callback invocation
Although Tree SRCU does reduce delays when there is at least one
synchronize_srcu_expedited() invocation pending, srcu_schedule_cbs_snp()
still waits for SRCU_INTERVAL before invoking callbacks. Since
synchronize_srcu_expedited() now posts a callback and waits for
that callback to do a wakeup, this destroys the expedited nature of
synchronize_srcu_expedited(). This destruction became apparent to
Marc Zyngier in the guise of a guest-OS bootup slowdown from five
seconds to no fewer than forty seconds.
This commit therefore invokes callbacks immediately at the end of the
grace period when there is at least one synchronize_srcu_expedited()
invocation pending. This brought Marc's guest-OS bootup times back
into the realm of reason.
Reported-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
index 1e54f91c2ff7..744ffdb79d23 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
@@ -447,7 +447,8 @@ static void srcu_schedule_cbs_snp(struct srcu_struct *sp, struct srcu_node *snp)
int cpu;
for (cpu = snp->grplo; cpu <= snp->grphi; cpu++)
- srcu_schedule_cbs_sdp(per_cpu_ptr(sp->sda, cpu), SRCU_INTERVAL);
+ srcu_schedule_cbs_sdp(per_cpu_ptr(sp->sda, cpu),
+ atomic_read(&sp->srcu_exp_cnt) ? 0 : SRCU_INTERVAL);
}
/*
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-18 17:33 [PATCH RFC srcu] Expedite srcu_schedule_cbs_snp() callback invocation Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-18 17:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-04-18 17:50 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
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=20170418175025.GX3956@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.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