public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@gmail.com>,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/6] rcu/segcblist: Add counters to segcblist datastructure
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 01:40:43 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201026054043.GA4192074@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201026003212.GA104441@lothringen>

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:32:12AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 03:08:09PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > @@ -307,6 +317,7 @@ void rcu_segcblist_extract_done_cbs(struct rcu_segcblist *rsclp,
> >  
> >  	if (!rcu_segcblist_ready_cbs(rsclp))
> >  		return; /* Nothing to do. */
> > +	rclp->len = rcu_segcblist_get_seglen(rsclp, RCU_DONE_TAIL);
> 
> I realize, doesn't it break the unsegmented count in srcu_invoke_callbacks() ?
> 
> It still does rcu_segcblist_insert_count(), so it adds zero to rsclp->len
> which thus doesn't get cleared and probably keeps growing.

You are right. This needs changing :-( Its my fault, I did not test SRCU
torture tests which are indeed failing.

I fixed it with the diff attached to the end of the email and will test it
more.

> >  	*rclp->tail = rsclp->head;
> >  	WRITE_ONCE(rsclp->head, *rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL]);
> >  	WRITE_ONCE(*rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL], NULL);
> > @@ -314,6 +325,7 @@ void rcu_segcblist_extract_done_cbs(struct rcu_segcblist *rsclp,
> >  	for (i = RCU_CBLIST_NSEGS - 1; i >= RCU_DONE_TAIL; i--)
> >  		if (rsclp->tails[i] == rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL])
> >  			WRITE_ONCE(rsclp->tails[i], &rsclp->head);
> > +	rcu_segcblist_set_seglen(rsclp, RCU_DONE_TAIL, 0);
> >  }
> >  
> >  /*
> > @@ -330,11 +342,16 @@ void rcu_segcblist_extract_pend_cbs(struct rcu_segcblist *rsclp,
> >  
> >  	if (!rcu_segcblist_pend_cbs(rsclp))
> >  		return; /* Nothing to do. */
> > +	rclp->len = rcu_segcblist_get_seglen(rsclp, RCU_WAIT_TAIL) +
> > +		    rcu_segcblist_get_seglen(rsclp, RCU_NEXT_READY_TAIL) +
> > +		    rcu_segcblist_get_seglen(rsclp, RCU_NEXT_TAIL);
> >  	*rclp->tail = *rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL];
> >  	rclp->tail = rsclp->tails[RCU_NEXT_TAIL];
> >  	WRITE_ONCE(*rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL], NULL);
> > -	for (i = RCU_DONE_TAIL + 1; i < RCU_CBLIST_NSEGS; i++)
> > +	for (i = RCU_DONE_TAIL + 1; i < RCU_CBLIST_NSEGS; i++) {
> >  		WRITE_ONCE(rsclp->tails[i], rsclp->tails[RCU_DONE_TAIL]);
> > +		rcu_segcblist_set_seglen(rsclp, i, 0);
> 
> You seem to have forgotten the suggestion?
> 
>     rclp->len += rcu_segcblist_get_seglen(rsclp, i)

I decided to keep it this way as I did not see how it could be better.
You mentioned you are Ok with either option so I left it as is.

Thanks!

 - Joel

---8<-----------------------

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
index 0f23d20d485a..79b7081143a7 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
@@ -1160,6 +1160,7 @@ static void srcu_advance_state(struct srcu_struct *ssp)
  */
 static void srcu_invoke_callbacks(struct work_struct *work)
 {
+	long len;
 	bool more;
 	struct rcu_cblist ready_cbs;
 	struct rcu_head *rhp;
@@ -1182,6 +1183,7 @@ static void srcu_invoke_callbacks(struct work_struct *work)
 	/* We are on the job!  Extract and invoke ready callbacks. */
 	sdp->srcu_cblist_invoking = true;
 	rcu_segcblist_extract_done_cbs(&sdp->srcu_cblist, &ready_cbs);
+	len = ready_cbs.len;
 	spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(sdp);
 	rhp = rcu_cblist_dequeue(&ready_cbs);
 	for (; rhp != NULL; rhp = rcu_cblist_dequeue(&ready_cbs)) {
@@ -1190,13 +1192,14 @@ static void srcu_invoke_callbacks(struct work_struct *work)
 		rhp->func(rhp);
 		local_bh_enable();
 	}
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(ready_cbs.len);
 
 	/*
 	 * Update counts, accelerate new callbacks, and if needed,
 	 * schedule another round of callback invocation.
 	 */
 	spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(sdp);
-	rcu_segcblist_insert_count(&sdp->srcu_cblist, &ready_cbs);
+	rcu_segcblist_add_len(&sdp->srcu_cblist, -len);
 	(void)rcu_segcblist_accelerate(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
 				       rcu_seq_snap(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq));
 	sdp->srcu_cblist_invoking = false;

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-26  5:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-21 19:08 [PATCH v8 0/6] Add support for length of each segment in the segcblist Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 1/6] rcu/tree: Make rcu_do_batch count how many callbacks were executed Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 2/6] rcu/segcblist: Add counters to segcblist datastructure Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-26  0:32   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-26  5:40     ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2020-10-26 11:24       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-27 17:30         ` Joel Fernandes
2020-10-26  0:50   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-26  5:45     ` Joel Fernandes
2020-10-26 11:28       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 3/6] rcu/trace: Add tracing for how segcb list changes Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-26 11:59   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-11-03 13:47     ` Joel Fernandes
2020-11-05  3:37       ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 4/6] rcu/segcblist: Remove useless rcupdate.h include Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 5/6] rcu/tree: segcblist: Remove redundant smp_mb()s Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-26 12:01   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-21 19:08 ` [PATCH v8 6/6] rcu/segcblist: Add additional comments to explain smp_mb() Joel Fernandes (Google)

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=20201026054043.GA4192074@google.com \
    --to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.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