public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: rcu-bh design
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:32:06 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180504173205.GQ26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180504123050.2841f80d@gandalf.local.home>

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 12:30:50PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2018 16:20:11 +0000
> Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Paul, everyone,
> > 
> > I had some question(s) about rcu-bh design.
> > I am trying to understand the reasoning or need of it. I see that rcu-bh
> > will disable softirqs across read-side sections. But I am wondering why
> > this is needed. __do_softirq already disables softirq when a softirq
> > handler is running. The only reason I can see is, rcu-bh helps in
> > situations where - a softirq interrupts a preemptible RCU read-section and
> > prevents that read section from completing. But this problem would happen
> > if anyone where to use rcu-preempt - then does rcu-preempt even make sense
> > to use and shouldn't everyone be using rcu-bh?
> 
> I thought rcu-bh uses softirqs as a quiescent state. Thus, blocking
> softirqs from happening makes sense. I don't think an
> rcu_read_lock_bh() makes sense in a softirq.

Agreed, any place in the code where bottom halves are enabled is an RCU-bh
quiescent state.

> > The other usecase for rcu-bh seems to be if context-switch is used as a
> > quiescent state, then softirq flood can prevent that from happening and
> > cause rcu grace periods from completing. 
> 
> > But preemptible RCU *does not* use context-switch as a quiescent state.
> 
> It doesn't?

It does, but only sort of.

A context switch really is always an RCU-preempt quiescent state from
the perspective of the CPU.  However, from the perspective of the task,
context switch is a quiescent state only if the task is not in an
RCU-preempt read-side critical section at the time.

> > So in that case rcu-bh would make
> > sense only in a configuration where we're not using preemptible-rcu at all
> > and are getting flooded by softirqs. Is that the reason rcu-bh needs to
> > exist?
> 
> Maybe I'm confused by what you are asking.

The existence and use of RCU-bh in no way degrades the preemptibility of
RCU-preempt read-side critical sections.  The reason is that RCU-bh and
RCU-preempt are completely separate, represented by different rcu_state
structure instances.

							Thanx, Paul

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-05-04 17:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-04 16:20 rcu-bh design Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 16:30 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-05-04 17:15   ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 17:43     ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 18:34       ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 18:49         ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 19:57           ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 20:11             ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 20:33               ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 22:49                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-04 23:20                   ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 23:43                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-05  0:39                       ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-04 17:32   ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-05-04 17:37     ` Steven Rostedt

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=20180504173205.GQ26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=joelaf@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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