public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	rushikesh.s.kadam@intel.com, urezki@gmail.com,
	neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com, paulmck@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	vineeth@bitbyteword.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/18] rcu: Introduce call_rcu_lazy() API implementation
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2022 17:21:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220902152132.GA115525@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220901221720.1105021-7-joel@joelfernandes.org>

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 10:17:08PM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> Implement timer-based RCU lazy callback batching. The batch is flushed
> whenever a certain amount of time has passed, or the batch on a
> particular CPU grows too big. Also memory pressure will flush it in a
> future patch.
> 
> To handle several corner cases automagically (such as rcu_barrier() and
> hotplug), we re-use bypass lists to handle lazy CBs. The bypass list
> length has the lazy CB length included in it. A separate lazy CB length
> counter is also introduced to keep track of the number of lazy CBs.
> 
> Suggested-by: Paul McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/rcupdate.h   |   6 ++
>  kernel/rcu/Kconfig         |   8 ++
>  kernel/rcu/rcu.h           |  11 +++
>  kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c |   2 +-
>  kernel/rcu/tree.c          | 130 +++++++++++++++---------
>  kernel/rcu/tree.h          |  13 ++-
>  kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h     | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  7 files changed, 280 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index 08605ce7379d..82e8a07e0856 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -108,6 +108,12 @@ static inline int rcu_preempt_depth(void)
>  
>  #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU */
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RCU_LAZY
> +void call_rcu_lazy(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func);
> +#else
> +#define call_rcu_lazy(head, func) call_rcu(head, func)

Why about an inline instead?

> +#endif
> +
>  /* Internal to kernel */
>  void rcu_init(void);
>  extern int rcu_scheduler_active;
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig
> index d471d22a5e21..3128d01427cb 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig
> @@ -311,4 +311,12 @@ config TASKS_TRACE_RCU_READ_MB
>  	  Say N here if you hate read-side memory barriers.
>  	  Take the default if you are unsure.
>  
> +config RCU_LAZY
> +	bool "RCU callback lazy invocation functionality"
> +	depends on RCU_NOCB_CPU
> +	default n
> +	help
> +	  To save power, batch RCU callbacks and flush after delay, memory
> +	  pressure or callback list growing too big.
> +
>  endmenu # "RCU Subsystem"
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> index be5979da07f5..94675f14efe8 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> @@ -474,6 +474,14 @@ enum rcutorture_type {
>  	INVALID_RCU_FLAVOR
>  };
>  
> +#if defined(CONFIG_RCU_LAZY)
> +unsigned long rcu_lazy_get_jiffies_till_flush(void);
> +void rcu_lazy_set_jiffies_till_flush(unsigned long j);
> +#else
> +static inline unsigned long rcu_lazy_get_jiffies_till_flush(void) { return 0; }
> +static inline void rcu_lazy_set_jiffies_till_flush(unsigned long j) { }
> +#endif
> +
>  #if defined(CONFIG_TREE_RCU)
>  void rcutorture_get_gp_data(enum rcutorture_type test_type, int *flags,
>  			    unsigned long *gp_seq);
> @@ -483,6 +491,8 @@ void do_trace_rcu_torture_read(const char *rcutorturename,
>  			       unsigned long c_old,
>  			       unsigned long c);
>  void rcu_gp_set_torture_wait(int duration);
> +void rcu_force_call_rcu_to_lazy(bool force);
> +
>  #else
>  static inline void rcutorture_get_gp_data(enum rcutorture_type test_type,
>  					  int *flags, unsigned long *gp_seq)
> @@ -501,6 +511,7 @@ void do_trace_rcu_torture_read(const char *rcutorturename,
>  	do { } while (0)
>  #endif
>  static inline void rcu_gp_set_torture_wait(int duration) { }
> +static inline void rcu_force_call_rcu_to_lazy(bool force) { }
>  #endif
>  
>  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST) || IS_MODULE(CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST)
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c b/kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c
> index c54ea2b6a36b..55b50e592986 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ void rcu_cblist_enqueue(struct rcu_cblist *rclp, struct rcu_head *rhp)
>   * element of the second rcu_cblist structure, but ensuring that the second
>   * rcu_cblist structure, if initially non-empty, always appears non-empty
>   * throughout the process.  If rdp is NULL, the second rcu_cblist structure
> - * is instead initialized to empty.
> + * is instead initialized to empty. Also account for lazy_len for lazy CBs.

Leftover?

> @@ -3904,7 +3943,8 @@ static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
>  	rdp->barrier_head.func = rcu_barrier_callback;
>  	debug_rcu_head_queue(&rdp->barrier_head);
>  	rcu_nocb_lock(rdp);
> -	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies));
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies, false,
> +		     /* wake gp thread */ true));

It's a bad sign when you need to start commenting your boolean parameters :)
Perhaps use a single two-bit flag instead of two booleans, for readability?

Also that's a subtle change which purpose isn't explained. It means that
rcu_barrier_entrain() used to wait for the bypass timer in the worst case
but now we force rcuog into it immediately. Should that be a separate change?

> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> index 31068dd31315..7e97a7b6e046 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> @@ -256,6 +256,31 @@ static bool wake_nocb_gp(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool force)
>  	return __wake_nocb_gp(rdp_gp, rdp, force, flags);
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * LAZY_FLUSH_JIFFIES decides the maximum amount of time that
> + * can elapse before lazy callbacks are flushed. Lazy callbacks
> + * could be flushed much earlier for a number of other reasons
> + * however, LAZY_FLUSH_JIFFIES will ensure no lazy callbacks are
> + * left unsubmitted to RCU after those many jiffies.
> + */
> +#define LAZY_FLUSH_JIFFIES (10 * HZ)
> +unsigned long jiffies_till_flush = LAZY_FLUSH_JIFFIES;

It seems this can be made static?

> @@ -265,23 +290,39 @@ static void wake_nocb_gp_defer(struct rcu_data *rdp, int waketype,
>  {
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	struct rcu_data *rdp_gp = rdp->nocb_gp_rdp;
> +	unsigned long mod_jif = 0;
>  
>  	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rdp_gp->nocb_gp_lock, flags);
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Bypass wakeup overrides previous deferments. In case
> -	 * of callback storm, no need to wake up too early.
> +	 * Bypass and lazy wakeup overrides previous deferments. In case of
> +	 * callback storm, no need to wake up too early.
>  	 */
> -	if (waketype == RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS) {
> -		mod_timer(&rdp_gp->nocb_timer, jiffies + 2);
> -		WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup, waketype);
> -	} else {
> +	switch (waketype) {
> +	case RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY:
> +		if (rdp->nocb_defer_wakeup != RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY)
> +			mod_jif = jiffies_till_flush;
> +		break;

Ah so this timer override all the others, and it's a several seconds
timers. Then I'll have a related concern on nocb_gp_wait().

> +
> +	case RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS:
> +		mod_jif = 2;
> +		break;
> +
> +	case RCU_NOCB_WAKE:
> +	case RCU_NOCB_WAKE_FORCE:
> +		// For these, make it wake up the soonest if we
> +		// were in a bypass or lazy sleep before.
>  		if (rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup < RCU_NOCB_WAKE)
> -			mod_timer(&rdp_gp->nocb_timer, jiffies + 1);
> -		if (rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup < waketype)
> -			WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup, waketype);
> +			mod_jif = 1;
> +		break;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (mod_jif)
> +		mod_timer(&rdp_gp->nocb_timer, jiffies + mod_jif);
> +
> +	if (rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup < waketype)
> +		WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup, waketype);

So RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS and RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY don't override the timer state
anymore? Looks like something is missing.

> +
>  	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rdp_gp->nocb_gp_lock, flags);
>  
>  	trace_rcu_nocb_wake(rcu_state.name, rdp->cpu, reason);
[...]
> @@ -705,12 +816,21 @@ static void nocb_gp_wait(struct rcu_data *my_rdp)
>  	my_rdp->nocb_gp_gp = needwait_gp;
>  	my_rdp->nocb_gp_seq = needwait_gp ? wait_gp_seq : 0;
>  
> -	if (bypass && !rcu_nocb_poll) {
> -		// At least one child with non-empty ->nocb_bypass, so set
> -		// timer in order to avoid stranding its callbacks.
> -		wake_nocb_gp_defer(my_rdp, RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS,
> -				   TPS("WakeBypassIsDeferred"));
> +	// At least one child with non-empty ->nocb_bypass, so set
> +	// timer in order to avoid stranding its callbacks.
> +	if (!rcu_nocb_poll) {
> +		// If bypass list only has lazy CBs. Add a deferred
> +		// lazy wake up.
> +		if (lazy && !bypass) {
> +			wake_nocb_gp_defer(my_rdp, RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY,
> +					TPS("WakeLazyIsDeferred"));

What if:

1) rdp(1) has lazy callbacks
2) all other rdp's have no callback at all
3) nocb_gp_wait() runs through all rdp's, everything is handled, except for
   these lazy callbacks
4) It reaches the above path, ready to arm the RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY timer,
   but it hasn't yet called wake_nocb_gp_defer()
5) Oh but rdp(2) queues a non-lazy callback. interrupts are disabled so it defers
   the wake up to nocb_gp_wait() with arming the timer in RCU_NOCB_WAKE.
6) nocb_gp_wait() finally calls wake_nocb_gp_defer() and override the timeout
   to several seconds ahead.
7) No more callbacks queued, the non-lazy callback will have to wait several
   seconds to complete.

Or did I miss something? Note that the race exists with RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS
but it's only about one jiffy delay, not seconds.


(further review later).

Thanks.

> +		// Otherwise add a deferred bypass wake up.
> +		} else if (bypass) {
> +			wake_nocb_gp_defer(my_rdp, RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS,
> +					TPS("WakeBypassIsDeferred"));
> +		}
>  	}
> +
>  	if (rcu_nocb_poll) {
>  		/* Polling, so trace if first poll in the series. */
>  		if (gotcbs)
> @@ -1036,7 +1156,7 @@ static long rcu_nocb_rdp_deoffload(void *arg)
>  	 * return false, which means that future calls to rcu_nocb_try_bypass()
>  	 * will refuse to put anything into the bypass.
>  	 */
> -	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies));
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies, false, false));
>  	/*
>  	 * Start with invoking rcu_core() early. This way if the current thread
>  	 * happens to preempt an ongoing call to rcu_core() in the middle,
> @@ -1290,6 +1410,7 @@ static void __init rcu_boot_init_nocb_percpu_data(struct rcu_data *rdp)
>  	raw_spin_lock_init(&rdp->nocb_gp_lock);
>  	timer_setup(&rdp->nocb_timer, do_nocb_deferred_wakeup_timer, 0);
>  	rcu_cblist_init(&rdp->nocb_bypass);
> +	WRITE_ONCE(rdp->lazy_len, 0);
>  	mutex_init(&rdp->nocb_gp_kthread_mutex);
>  }
>  
> @@ -1571,13 +1692,14 @@ static void rcu_init_one_nocb(struct rcu_node *rnp)
>  }
>  
>  static bool rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(struct rcu_data *rdp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
> -				  unsigned long j)
> +				  unsigned long j, bool lazy, bool wakegp)
>  {
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
>  static bool rcu_nocb_try_bypass(struct rcu_data *rdp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
> -				bool *was_alldone, unsigned long flags)
> +				bool *was_alldone, unsigned long flags,
> +				bool lazy)
>  {
>  	return false;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.37.2.789.g6183377224-goog
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-02 15:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-01 22:17 [PATCH v5 00/18] Implement call_rcu_lazy() and miscellaneous fixes Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] mm/slub: perform free consistency checks before call_rcu Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] mm/sl[au]b: rearrange struct slab fields to allow larger rcu_head Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-02  9:26   ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-02  9:30     ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-02 15:09       ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-03 13:53         ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] rcu/tree: Use READ_ONCE() for lockless read of rnp->qsmask Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-06 22:26   ` Boqun Feng
2022-09-06 22:31     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] rcu: Fix late wakeup when flush of bypass cblist happens Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-02 11:35   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-02 23:58     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-03 15:10       ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-04 21:13       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-03 14:04   ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-03 14:05     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06  3:07   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06  9:48     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07  2:43       ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] rcu: Move trace_rcu_callback() before bypassing Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] rcu: Introduce call_rcu_lazy() API implementation Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-02 15:21   ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2022-09-02 23:09     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-05 12:59       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-05 20:18         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-05 20:32         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06  8:55           ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-06 16:16             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 17:05               ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-03 22:00     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-04 21:01       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-05 20:20         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06  3:05     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 15:17       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-06 16:15         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 16:31           ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 16:38             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 16:43               ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 19:11                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07  2:56                   ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-07  9:56                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07 10:03           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07 14:01             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-07  0:06         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-07  9:40           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07 13:44             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-07 15:38               ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-07 15:39                 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-21 23:52             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-06 18:16       ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-06 18:21         ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-07  8:52           ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-07 15:23             ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-03 14:03   ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-03 14:05     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] rcu: shrinker for lazy rcu Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 08/18] rcu: Add per-CB tracing for queuing, flush and invocation Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-02 16:48   ` kernel test robot
2022-09-03 12:39     ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-03 14:07       ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-02 19:01   ` kernel test robot
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] rcuscale: Add laziness and kfree tests Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] rcutorture: Add test code for call_rcu_lazy() Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] fs: Move call_rcu() to call_rcu_lazy() in some paths Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] cred: Move call_rcu() to call_rcu_lazy() Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] security: " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] net/core: " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] kernel: Move various core kernel usages " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] lib: Move call_rcu() " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] i915: " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-01 22:17 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] fork: Move thread_stack_free_rcu() " Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-03 15:22 ` [PATCH v5 00/18] Implement call_rcu_lazy() and miscellaneous fixes 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=20220902152132.GA115525@lothringen \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=rushikesh.s.kadam@intel.com \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=vineeth@bitbyteword.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