public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.


  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