public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Steven Davis <goldside000@outlook.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, ankur.a.arora@oracle.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq_work: Replace wait loop with rcuwait_wait_event
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 20:10:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ikurhvf1.fsf@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZuxRRZh-2NAlj96l@localhost.localdomain>


Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> writes:

> Le Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 11:43:26AM -0400, Steven Davis a écrit :
>> The previous implementation of irq_work_sync used a busy-wait
>> loop with cpu_relax() to check the status of IRQ work. This
>> approach, while functional, could lead to inefficiencies in
>> CPU usage.
>>
>> This commit replaces the busy-wait loop with the rcuwait_wait_event
>> mechanism. This change leverages the RCU wait mechanism to handle
>> waiting for IRQ work completion more efficiently, improving CPU
>> responsiveness and reducing unnecessary CPU usage.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Davis <goldside000@outlook.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/irq_work.c | 3 +--
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/irq_work.c b/kernel/irq_work.c
>> index 2f4fb336dda1..2b092a1d07a9 100644
>> --- a/kernel/irq_work.c
>> +++ b/kernel/irq_work.c
>> @@ -295,8 +295,7 @@ void irq_work_sync(struct irq_work *work)
>>  		return;
>>  	}
>>
>> -	while (irq_work_is_busy(work))
>> -		cpu_relax();
>> +	rcuwait_wait_event(&work->irqwait, !irq_work_is_busy(work), TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
>
> Dan Carpenter brought to my attention this a few weeks ago for another problem.:
>
> perf_remove_from_context() <- disables preempt
> __perf_event_exit_context() <- disables preempt
> -> __perf_remove_from_context()
>    -> perf_group_detach()
>       -> perf_put_aux_event()
>          -> put_event()
>             -> _free_event()
>                -> irq_work_sync()

irq_work_sync() is also annotated with might_sleep() (probably how Dan
saw it) so in principle the rcuwait_wait_event() isn't wrong there.


--
ankur

  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-20  3:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-19 15:43 [PATCH] irq_work: Replace wait loop with rcuwait_wait_event Steven Davis
2024-09-19 16:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-09-20  3:10   ` Ankur Arora [this message]
2024-09-20 18:22     ` Steven Davis
2024-09-23  6:35       ` Ankur Arora
2024-09-23 21:37         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-09-23 21:41 ` 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=87ikurhvf1.fsf@oracle.com \
    --to=ankur.a.arora@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=goldside000@outlook.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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