public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <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: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220925220045.GA182613@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22F29015-5962-433D-8815-E4154B4897DD@joelfernandes.org>

On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 09:00:39PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Sep 24, 2022, at 7:28 PM, Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Frederic, thanks for the response, replies
> > below courtesy fruit company’s device:
> > 
> >>> On Sep 24, 2022, at 6:46 PM, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> 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.
> > 
> > I wanted to do that, however on discussion with
> > Paul I thought of making this optimization only for
> > all lazy bypass CBs. That makes it directly related
> > this patch since the laziness notion is first
> > introduced here. On the other hand I could make
> > this change in a later patch since we are not
> > super bisectable anyway courtesy of the last
> > patch (which is not really an issue if the CONFIG
> > is kept off during someone’s bisection.
> 
> Or are we saying it’s worth doing the wake up for rcu barrier even for regular bypass CB? That’d save 2 jiffies on rcu barrier. If we agree it’s needed, then yes splitting the patch makes sense.
> 
> Please let me know your opinions, thanks,
> 
>  - Joel

Sure, I mean since we are fixing the buggy rcu_barrier_entrain() anyway, let's
just fix bypass as well. Such as in the following (untested):

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index b39e97175a9e..a0df964abb0e 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -3834,6 +3834,8 @@ static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
 {
 	unsigned long gseq = READ_ONCE(rcu_state.barrier_sequence);
 	unsigned long lseq = READ_ONCE(rdp->barrier_seq_snap);
+	bool wake_nocb = false;
+	bool was_alldone = false;
 
 	lockdep_assert_held(&rcu_state.barrier_lock);
 	if (rcu_seq_state(lseq) || !rcu_seq_state(gseq) || rcu_seq_ctr(lseq) != rcu_seq_ctr(gseq))
@@ -3842,6 +3844,8 @@ 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);
+	if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp) && !rcu_segcblist_pend_cbs(&rdp->cblist))
+		was_alldone = true;
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies));
 	if (rcu_segcblist_entrain(&rdp->cblist, &rdp->barrier_head)) {
 		atomic_inc(&rcu_state.barrier_cpu_count);
@@ -3849,7 +3853,12 @@ static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
 		debug_rcu_head_unqueue(&rdp->barrier_head);
 		rcu_barrier_trace(TPS("IRQNQ"), -1, rcu_state.barrier_sequence);
 	}
+	if (was_alldone && rcu_segcblist_pend_cbs(&rdp->cblist))
+		wake_nocb = true;
 	rcu_nocb_unlock(rdp);
+	if (wake_nocb)
+		wake_nocb_gp(rdp, false);
+
 	smp_store_release(&rdp->barrier_seq_snap, gseq);
 }
 
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
index d4a97e40ea9c..925dd98f8b23 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
@@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ static void zero_cpu_stall_ticks(struct rcu_data *rdp);
 static struct swait_queue_head *rcu_nocb_gp_get(struct rcu_node *rnp);
 static void rcu_nocb_gp_cleanup(struct swait_queue_head *sq);
 static void rcu_init_one_nocb(struct rcu_node *rnp);
+static bool wake_nocb_gp(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool force);
 static bool rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(struct rcu_data *rdp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
 				  unsigned long j);
 static bool rcu_nocb_try_bypass(struct rcu_data *rdp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
index 538a0ed93946..e1701aa9c82c 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
@@ -1600,6 +1600,10 @@ static void rcu_init_one_nocb(struct rcu_node *rnp)
 {
 }
 
+static bool wake_nocb_gp(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool force)
+{
+}
+
 static bool rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(struct rcu_data *rdp, struct rcu_head *rhp,
 				  unsigned long j)
 {

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-25 22:00 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
2022-09-24 23:28     ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25  1:00       ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-25 22:00         ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
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=20220925220045.GA182613@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