From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
To: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Review of RCU-related patches in -rt
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 13:50:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190528205030.GA27149@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
Hello, Sebastian,
Finally getting around to taking another look:
c7e07056a108 EXP rcu: skip the workqueue path on RT
This one makes sense given the later commit setting the
rcu_normal_after_boot kernel parameter. Otherwise, it is
slowing down expedited grace periods for no reason. But
should the check also include rcu_normal_after_boot and
rcu_normal? For example:
if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL) &&
(rcu_normal || rcu_normal_after_boot) ||
!READ_ONCE(rcu_par_gp_wq) ||
rcu_scheduler_active != RCU_SCHEDULER_RUNNING ||
rcu_is_last_leaf_node(rnp)) {
Alternatively, one approach would be to take the kernel
parameters out in -rt:
static int rcu_normal_after_boot = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL);
#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
module_param(rcu_normal_after_boot, int, 0);
#endif
And similar for rcu_normal and rcu_expedited.
Or is there some reason to allow run-time expedited grace
periods in CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL=y kernels?
d1f52391bd8a rcu: Disable RCU_FAST_NO_HZ on RT
Looks good. More complexity could be added if too many people
get themselves in trouble via "select RCU_FAST_NO_HZ".
42b346870326 rcu: make RCU_BOOST default on RT
To avoid complaints about this showing up when people don't
expected, could you please instead "select RCU_BOOST" in
the Kconfig definition of PREEMPT_RT_FULL?
Or do people really want to be able to disable boosting?
457c1b0d9c0e sched: Do not account rcu_preempt_depth on RT in might_sleep()
The idea behind this one is to avoid false-positive complaints
about -rt's sleeping spinlocks, correct?
7ee13e640b01 rbtree: don't include the rcu header
c9b0c9b87081 rtmutex: annotate sleeping lock context
No specific comments.
7912d002ebf9 rcu: Eliminate softirq processing from rcutree
This hasn't caused any problems in -rcu from what I can see.
I am therefore planning to submit the -rcu variant of this to
mainline during the next merge window.
f06d34ebdbbb srcu: Remove srcu_queue_delayed_work_on()
Looks plausible. I will check more carefully for mainline.
aeb04e894cc9 srcu: replace local_irqsave() with a locallock
e48989b033ad irqwork: push most work into softirq context
These look to still be -rt only.
Thanx, Paul
next reply other threads:[~2019-05-28 20:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-28 20:50 Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2019-06-07 16:08 ` Review of RCU-related patches in -rt Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-06-20 22:32 ` 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=20190528205030.GA27149@linux.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).