From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@amd.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>, rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] rcu/exp: Remove confusing needless full barrier on task unblock
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 16:59:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250225215908.GA1812344@joelnvbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250213232559.34163-3-frederic@kernel.org>
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 12:25:58AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> A full memory barrier in the RCU-PREEMPT task unblock path advertizes
> to order the context switch (or rather the accesses prior to
> rcu_read_unlock()) with the expedited grace period fastpath.
>
> However the grace period can not complete without the rnp calling into
> rcu_report_exp_rnp() with the node locked. This reports the quiescent
> state in a fully ordered fashion against updater's accesses thanks to:
>
> 1) The READ-SIDE smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() barrier accross nodes
> locking while propagating QS up to the root.
>
> 2) The UPDATE-SIDE smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() barrier while holding the
> the root rnp to wait/check for the GP completion.
>
> 3) The (perhaps redundant given step 1) and 2)) smp_mb() in rcu_seq_end()
> before the grace period completes.
>
> This makes the explicit barrier in this place superflous. Therefore
> remove it as it is confusing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> index 3c0bbbbb686f..d51cc7a5dfc7 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> @@ -534,7 +534,6 @@ rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long flags)
> WARN_ON_ONCE(rnp->completedqs == rnp->gp_seq &&
> (!empty_norm || rnp->qsmask));
> empty_exp = sync_rcu_exp_done(rnp);
> - smp_mb(); /* ensure expedited fastpath sees end of RCU c-s. */
I was wondering though, this is a slow path and the smp_mb() has been there
since 2009 or so. Not sure if it is super valuable to remove it at this
point. But we/I should definitely understand it.
I was wondering if you could also point to the fastpath that this is racing
with, it is not immediately clear (to me) what this smp_mb() is pairing with :(
thanks,
- Joel
> np = rcu_next_node_entry(t, rnp);
> list_del_init(&t->rcu_node_entry);
> t->rcu_blocked_node = NULL;
> --
> 2.46.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-25 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-13 23:25 [PATCH 0/3] rcu/exp updates Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-13 23:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] rcu/exp: Protect against early QS report Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-14 9:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-03-13 16:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-03-13 17:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-13 23:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] rcu/exp: Remove confusing needless full barrier on task unblock Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-25 21:59 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2025-02-26 0:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-26 12:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-26 15:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-26 15:26 ` Joel Fernandes
2025-02-26 15:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-13 23:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] rcu/exp: Remove needless CPU up quiescent state report Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-14 9:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-14 12:10 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-15 10:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-15 22:23 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-19 14:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-19 15:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 15:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-21 15:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-26 0:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-03-03 20:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-03-14 14:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-03-18 17:07 ` 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=20250225215908.GA1812344@joelnvbox \
--to=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@amd.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--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