From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Chris von Recklinghausen <crecklin@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz_full: don't abuse smp_call_function_single() in tick_setup_device()
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:03:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240601140321.GA3758@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZliSt-RDyxf1bZ_t@localhost.localdomain>
Hi Frederic,
First of all, can we please make the additional changes you suggest on top of
this patch? I'd prefer to keep it as simple as possible, I will need to backport
it and I'd like to simplify the internal review.
On 05/30, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> And after all, pushing a bit further your subsequent patch, can we get rid of
> tick_do_timer_boot_cpu and ifdefery altogether? Such as:
Sure, I thought about this from the very beginning, see
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240525135120.GA24152@redhat.com/
and the changelog in
[PATCH] tick/nohz_full: turn tick_do_timer_boot_cpu into boot_cpu_is_nohz_full
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240530124032.GA26833@redhat.com/
on top of this patch.
And yes, in this case it is better to check that tick_do_timer_cpu != _NONE to
ensure that tick_nohz_full_cpu(tick_cpu) can't crash.
So I considered the change which is very close to yours, except
> + } else if (timekeeper == TICK_DO_TIMER_NONE) {
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(tick_nohz_full_enabled()))
> + WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
I don't think we need to change tick_do_timer_cpu in this case.
And I am not sure we need to check tick_nohz_full_enabled() here.
IOW, I was thinking about
if (!td->evtdev) {
int tick_cpu = READ_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu);
/*
* If no cpu took the do_timer update, assign it to
* this cpu:
*/
if (tick_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
tick_next_period = ktime_get();
/*
* The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case the
* first housekeeping secondary will take do_timer()
* from us.
*/
} else if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(tick_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_NONE)) &&
tick_nohz_full_cpu(tick_cpu) &&
!tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu)) {
/*
* The boot CPU will stay in periodic (NOHZ disabled)
* mode until clocksource_done_booting() called after
* smp_init() selects a high resolution clocksource and
* timekeeping_notify() kicks the NOHZ stuff alive.
*
* So this WRITE_ONCE can only race with the READ_ONCE
* check in tick_periodic() but this race is harmless.
*/
WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
}
But you know, somehow I like
[PATCH] tick/nohz_full: turn tick_do_timer_boot_cpu into boot_cpu_is_nohz_full
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240530124032.GA26833@redhat.com/
a bit more, to me the code looks more understandable this way.
Note that this patch doesn't really need to keep #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL,
if (!td->evtdev) {
static bool boot_cpu_is_nohz_full;
/*
* If no cpu took the do_timer update, assign it to
* this cpu:
*/
if (READ_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu) == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
tick_next_period = ktime_get();
/*
* The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case the
* first housekeeping secondary will take do_timer()
* from us.
*/
boot_cpu_is_nohz_full = tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu);
} else if (boot_cpu_is_nohz_full && !tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu)) {
boot_cpu_is_nohz_full = false;
/*
* The boot CPU will stay in periodic (NOHZ disabled)
* mode until clocksource_done_booting() called after
* smp_init() selects a high resolution clocksource and
* timekeeping_notify() kicks the NOHZ stuff alive.
*
* So this WRITE_ONCE can only race with the READ_ONCE
* check in tick_periodic() but this race is harmless.
*/
WRITE_ONCE(tick_do_timer_cpu, cpu);
}
should work without #ifdef.
In this case I don't think we need the _NONE check, tick_sched_do_timer() will
complain.
But I won't argue. I will be happy to make V2 which follows your recommendations
but again, can I do this on top of this patch?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-01 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-22 15:17 sched/isolation: tick_take_do_timer_from_boot() calls smp_call_function_single() with irqs disabled Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-23 13:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-24 9:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-24 14:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-24 15:22 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-24 15:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-24 17:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-24 18:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-24 22:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-25 13:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-25 14:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-26 19:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-26 20:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-27 15:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-27 11:01 ` Nicholas Piggin
2024-05-27 15:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-28 1:02 ` Nicholas Piggin
2024-05-28 12:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-27 16:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-26 20:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-27 9:10 ` Nicholas Piggin
2024-05-27 10:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-27 11:16 ` Nicholas Piggin
2024-05-28 12:20 ` [PATCH] tick/nohz_full: don't abuse smp_call_function_single() in tick_setup_device() Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-28 12:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-30 12:40 ` [PATCH] tick/nohz_full: turn tick_do_timer_boot_cpu into boot_cpu_is_nohz_full Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-03 15:35 ` [PATCH v2] " Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-03 21:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-06-04 5:08 ` Nicholas Piggin
2024-05-30 14:52 ` [PATCH] tick/nohz_full: don't abuse smp_call_function_single() in tick_setup_device() Frederic Weisbecker
2024-05-30 16:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-30 17:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-01 14:03 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2024-06-02 21:29 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-06-03 15:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-03 21:45 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-06-10 15:55 ` [PING ;)] " Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-10 18:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-06-10 18:26 ` [tip: timers/urgent] tick/nohz_full: Don't " tip-bot2 for Oleg Nesterov
2024-06-10 19:42 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20240601140321.GA3758@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=crecklin@redhat.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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