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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] rcu: Make call_rcu() lazy to save power
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2022 00:46:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220924224637.GA161871@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220922220104.2446868-2-joel@joelfernandes.org>
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 10:01:01PM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> @@ -3902,7 +3939,11 @@ 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));
> + /*
> + * Flush the bypass list, but also wake up the GP thread as otherwise
> + * bypass/lazy CBs maynot be noticed, and can cause real long delays!
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies, FLUSH_BP_WAKE));
This fixes an issue that goes beyond lazy implementation. It should be done
in a separate patch, handling rcu_segcblist_entrain() as well, with "Fixes: " tag.
And then FLUSH_BP_WAKE is probably not needed anymore.
> if (rcu_segcblist_entrain(&rdp->cblist, &rdp->barrier_head)) {
> atomic_inc(&rcu_state.barrier_cpu_count);
> } else {
> @@ -269,10 +294,14 @@ static void wake_nocb_gp_defer(struct rcu_data *rdp, int waketype,
> 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 wakeup overrides previous deferments. In case of
> + * callback storm, no need to wake up too early.
> */
> - if (waketype == RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS) {
> + if (waketype == RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY
> + && READ_ONCE(rdp->nocb_defer_wakeup) == RCU_NOCB_WAKE_NOT) {
This can be a plain READ since ->nocb_defer_wakeup is only written under ->nocb_gp_lock.
> + mod_timer(&rdp_gp->nocb_timer, jiffies + jiffies_till_flush);
> + WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup, waketype);
> + } else if (waketype == RCU_NOCB_WAKE_BYPASS) {
> mod_timer(&rdp_gp->nocb_timer, jiffies + 2);
> WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_defer_wakeup, waketype);
> } else {
> @@ -512,9 +598,16 @@ static void __call_rcu_nocb_wake(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool was_alldone,
> }
> // Need to actually to a wakeup.
> len = rcu_segcblist_n_cbs(&rdp->cblist);
> + bypass_len = rcu_cblist_n_cbs(&rdp->nocb_bypass);
> + lazy_len = READ_ONCE(rdp->lazy_len);
> if (was_alldone) {
> rdp->qlen_last_fqs_check = len;
> - if (!irqs_disabled_flags(flags)) {
> + // Only lazy CBs in bypass list
> + if (lazy_len && bypass_len == lazy_len) {
> + rcu_nocb_unlock_irqrestore(rdp, flags);
> + wake_nocb_gp_defer(rdp, RCU_NOCB_WAKE_LAZY,
> + TPS("WakeLazy"));
I'm trying to think of a case where rcu_nocb_try_bypass() returns false
(queue to regular list) but then call_rcu() -> __call_rcu_nocb_wake() ends up
seeing a lazy bypass queue even though we are queueing a non-lazy callback
(should have flushed in this case).
Looks like it shouldn't happen, even with concurrent (de-offloading) but just
in case, can we add:
WARN_ON_ONCE(lazy_len != len)
> + } else if (!irqs_disabled_flags(flags)) {
> /* ... if queue was empty ... */
> rcu_nocb_unlock_irqrestore(rdp, flags);
> wake_nocb_gp(rdp, false);
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-24 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-22 22:01 [PATCH v6 0/4] rcu: call_rcu() power improvements Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-22 22:01 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] rcu: Make call_rcu() lazy to save power Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-23 21:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-24 16:20 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-24 21:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-24 22:56 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25 17:31 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 17:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 21:07 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 22:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 23:33 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 23:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-03 19:33 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-10-03 19:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-24 22:46 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2022-09-24 23:28 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25 1:00 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25 22:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-26 15:04 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 17:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 23:37 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25 22:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-26 17:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-25 8:57 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-25 17:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 17:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 19:32 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-26 21:02 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 22:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 23:47 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 23:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 1:49 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 3:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 13:05 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 14:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 14:22 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 14:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 15:25 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 15:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <CAEXW_YRpAjvmBPzRA-hRQpuaDuZUzfndLb3q+e3BUyWprg5wkQ@mail.gmail.com>
2022-09-27 3:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 22:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 19:39 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-26 20:54 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 22:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-26 23:44 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-26 23:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 1:16 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 3:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-09-27 14:08 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-27 14:30 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 14:59 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-27 15:13 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-27 21:31 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-09-27 22:05 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 22:29 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-30 16:11 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-10-04 11:35 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-10-04 18:06 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-27 15:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-22 22:01 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] rcu: shrinker for lazy rcu Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-22 22:01 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] rcuscale: Add laziness and kfree tests Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-22 22:01 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] percpu-refcount: Use call_rcu_flush() for atomic switch 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=20220924224637.GA161871@lothringen \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--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 \
/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