From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] rcu-tasks: Maintain real-time response in rcu_tasks_postscan()
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 13:17:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZdiMympnNOo6e+5T@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a27f638-4eb0-42b3-b8a3-201d6ed9406b@paulmck-laptop>
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:56:46PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 12:52:24PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > > index 4dc355b2ac22..866743e0796f 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > > > @@ -971,13 +971,32 @@ static void rcu_tasks_postscan(struct list_head *hop)
> > > > */
> > > >
> > > > for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > > > + unsigned long j = jiffies + 1;
> > > > struct rcu_tasks_percpu *rtpcp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_tasks.rtpcpu, cpu);
> > > > struct task_struct *t;
> > > > + struct task_struct *t1;
> > > > + struct list_head tmp;
> > > >
> > > > raw_spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
> > > > - list_for_each_entry(t, &rtpcp->rtp_exit_list, rcu_tasks_exit_list)
> > > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(t, t1, &rtpcp->rtp_exit_list, rcu_tasks_exit_list) {
> > > > if (list_empty(&t->rcu_tasks_holdout_list))
> > > > rcu_tasks_pertask(t, hop);
> > > > +
> > > > + // RT kernels need frequent pauses, otherwise
> > > > + // pause at least once per pair of jiffies.
> > > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && time_before(jiffies, j))
> > > > + continue;
> > > > +
> > > > + // Keep our place in the list while pausing.
> > > > + // Nothing else traverses this list, so adding a
> > > > + // bare list_head is OK.
> > > > + list_add(&tmp, &t->rcu_tasks_exit_list);
> > >
> > > I'm a bit confused about what this does...
Oh, ok now I see what you're doing! My fear was that t goes off but doesn't
remove itself and then the list_del() crashes. But no actually tmp places itself
after t and then if t exits, it removes itself before tmp and that's fine.
> > >
> > > > + raw_spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
> > > > + cond_resched(); // For CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernels
> > > > + raw_spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
> > > > + list_del(&tmp);
> > >
> > > Isn't there a risk that t is reaped by then? If it was not observed on_rq
> > > while calling rcu_tasks_pertask() then there is no get_task_struct.
> >
> > That is OK, courtesy of the _safe in list_for_each_entry_safe().
> >
> > > And what about t1? Can't it be reaped as well?
> >
> > It can, and that is a problem, good catch!
> >
> > My current thought is to add this before the list_del(), which is
> > admittedly a bit crude:
> >
> > t1 = tmp.next;
>
> OK, OK... ;-)
>
> t1 = list_entry(tmp.next, struct task_struct, rcu_tasks_exit_list);
>
> Is there still a better way?
That should work.
An (untested) alternative that fiddles a bit less with list internals could look like this:
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
index 866743e0796f..0ff2b554f5b5 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
@@ -973,12 +973,13 @@ static void rcu_tasks_postscan(struct list_head *hop)
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
unsigned long j = jiffies + 1;
struct rcu_tasks_percpu *rtpcp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_tasks.rtpcpu, cpu);
- struct task_struct *t;
- struct task_struct *t1;
- struct list_head tmp;
raw_spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
- list_for_each_entry_safe(t, t1, &rtpcp->rtp_exit_list, rcu_tasks_exit_list) {
+ while (!list_empty(&rtpcp->rtp_exit_list)) {
+ struct task_struct *t;
+ t = list_first_entry(&rtpcp->rtp_exit_list, typeof(*t), rcu_tasks_exit_list);
+ list_del_init(&t->rcu_tasks_exit_list);
+
if (list_empty(&t->rcu_tasks_holdout_list))
rcu_tasks_pertask(t, hop);
@@ -987,14 +988,9 @@ static void rcu_tasks_postscan(struct list_head *hop)
if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && time_before(jiffies, j))
continue;
- // Keep our place in the list while pausing.
- // Nothing else traverses this list, so adding a
- // bare list_head is OK.
- list_add(&tmp, &t->rcu_tasks_exit_list);
raw_spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
cond_resched(); // For CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernels
raw_spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
- list_del(&tmp);
j = jiffies + 1;
}
raw_spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(rtpcp);
@@ -1219,7 +1215,6 @@ void exit_tasks_rcu_stop(void)
struct rcu_tasks_percpu *rtpcp;
struct task_struct *t = current;
- WARN_ON_ONCE(list_empty(&t->rcu_tasks_exit_list));
rtpcp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_tasks.rtpcpu, t->rcu_tasks_exit_cpu);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rtpcp, flags);
list_del_init(&t->rcu_tasks_exit_list);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-23 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-17 1:27 [PATCH v2 0/6] RCU tasks fixes for v6.9 Boqun Feng
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] rcu-tasks: Repair RCU Tasks Trace quiescence check Boqun Feng
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] rcu-tasks: Add data to eliminate RCU-tasks/do_exit() deadlocks Boqun Feng
2024-02-22 16:54 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-22 20:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] rcu-tasks: Initialize " Boqun Feng
2024-02-22 16:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-22 20:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-23 11:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] rcu-tasks: Maintain lists " Boqun Feng
2024-02-22 16:32 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-23 12:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-24 0:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] rcu-tasks: Eliminate deadlocks involving do_exit() and RCU tasks Boqun Feng
2024-02-22 16:46 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-17 1:27 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] rcu-tasks: Maintain real-time response in rcu_tasks_postscan() Boqun Feng
2024-02-22 17:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-22 20:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-22 22:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-23 12:17 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2024-02-23 15:14 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-24 0:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-22 16:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] RCU tasks fixes for v6.9 Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-22 22:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-23 12:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-24 0:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-02-26 13:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-02-26 14:37 ` 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=ZdiMympnNOo6e+5T@lothringen \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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