From: "Zqiang" <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
To: paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: frederic@kernel.org, neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org,
joelagnelf@nvidia.com, urezki@gmail.com, boqun@kernel.org,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Use __set_current_state() set task state in rcu_nocb_toggle()
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2026 13:15:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <490e998c483920e9e7bd796b00a337bcd11aa129@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c826b59e-993f-4ff5-ac1a-6898bfaf05cc@paulmck-laptop>
>
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 06:11:25PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
>
> >
> > In the rcu_nocb_toggle(), the schedule_hrtimeout() is called after the
> > state assignment with no condition check. the release-acquire pair from
> > raw_spin_unlock/lock(&cpu_base->lock), guarantee that task->__state is
> > visible to the hrtimer callback:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
> > ->WRITE_ONCE(task->__state, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
> > schedule_hrtimeout
> > ->hrtimer_sleeper_start_expires()
> > ->raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_base->lock)
> > ....
> > ->raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_base->lock)
> >
> > hard-irq:
> > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_base->lock)
> > __hrtimer_run_queues
> > ->__run_hrtimer
> > ->raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_base->lock)
> > ->fn(timer)
> > ->hrtimer_wakeup
> > ->wake_up_process
> > ->try_to_wake_up
> > ->READ task->__state
> >
> > This commit therefore use the __set_current_state() to replace the
> > set_current_state() in rcu_nocb_toggle().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
> >
> This looks correct, and either drops an smp_mb() or converts an
> xchg() to a WRITE_ONCE(), which does decrease overhead. Except that
> rcu_nocb_toggle() is invoked very infrequently and has high overhead
> that I would expect to lose this overhead decrease in the noise. And it
> forces those reading the code to go figure out what is different between
> set_current_state() and __set_current_state().
>
> So I am not convinced to take this patch. But am I missing something here?
Nothing was missed, only from memory ordering perspective,
using set_current_state() is unnecessary.
furthermore, in RCU tasks, we used the following code:
__set_current_state(TASK_IDLE); // in this we use __set_current_state()
schedule_hrtimeout_range(&exp, jiffies_to_nsecs(HZ / 2), HRTIMER_MODE_REL_HARD);
Or perhaps we could also add a comment something like this(kernel/time/sleep_timeout.c):
/*
* __set_current_state() can be used in schedule_timeout_*() functions, because
* schedule_timeout() calls schedule() unconditionally.
*/
Thanks
Zqiang
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> >
> > ---
> > kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > index b1bab59efde5..a0e6901e0f90 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > @@ -2947,7 +2947,7 @@ static int rcu_nocb_toggle(void *arg)
> > atomic_long_inc(&n_nocb_deoffload);
> > }
> > toggle_delay = torture_random(&rand) % toggle_fuzz + toggle_interval;
> > - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > + __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > schedule_hrtimeout(&toggle_delay, HRTIMER_MODE_REL);
> > if (stutter_wait("rcu_nocb_toggle"))
> > sched_set_normal(current, oldnice);
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-07 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-02 10:11 [PATCH] rcutorture: Use __set_current_state() set task state in rcu_nocb_toggle() Zqiang
2026-07-06 18:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-07 13:15 ` Zqiang [this message]
2026-07-07 16:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-09 12:05 ` Zqiang
2026-07-07 15:36 ` Alan Huang
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=490e998c483920e9e7bd796b00a337bcd11aa129@linux.dev \
--to=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--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