public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@meta.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rcu 2/9] rcu: Reduce synchronize_rcu() delays when all wait heads are in use
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 14:09:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZmBVfpyEZeTIAHJn@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240604222355.2370768-2-paulmck@kernel.org>

Le Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney a écrit :
> From: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>
> 
> When all wait heads are in use, which can happen when
> rcu_sr_normal_gp_cleanup_work()'s callback processing
> is slow, any new synchronize_rcu() user's rcu_synchronize
> node's processing is deferred to future GP periods. This
> can result in long list of synchronize_rcu() invocations
> waiting for full grace period processing, which can delay
> freeing of memory. Mitigate this problem by using first
> node in the list as wait tail when all wait heads are in use.
> While methods to speed up callback processing would be needed
> to recover from this situation, allowing new nodes to complete
> their grace period can help prevent delays due to a fixed
> number of wait head nodes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>

IIRC we agreed that this patch could be a step too far that
made an already not so simple state machine even less simple,
breaking the wait_head based flow.

Should we postpone this change until it is observed that a workqueue
not being scheduled for 5 grace periods is a real issue?

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-05 12:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-04 22:23 [PATCH rcu 0/9] Miscellaneous fixes for v6.11 Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 1/9] rcu: Add lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock() and friends Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-20 19:38   ` Jeff Johnson
2025-02-20 22:04     ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-20 23:51       ` Jeff Johnson
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 2/9] rcu: Reduce synchronize_rcu() delays when all wait heads are in use Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-05 12:09   ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2024-06-05 18:38     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-06  3:46       ` Neeraj Upadhyay
2024-06-06 16:49         ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-11 10:12           ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 3/9] rcu/tree: Reduce wake up for synchronize_rcu() common case Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-05 16:35   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-06-05 18:42     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-06  5:58     ` Neeraj upadhyay
2024-06-06 18:12       ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-07  1:51         ` Neeraj upadhyay
2024-06-10 15:12           ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-11 13:46             ` Neeraj upadhyay
2024-06-11 16:17               ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 4/9] rcu: Disable interrupts directly in rcu_gp_init() Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 5/9] srcu: Disable interrupts directly in srcu_gp_end() Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 6/9] rcu: Add rcutree.nocb_patience_delay to reduce nohz_full OS jitter Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-10  5:05   ` Leonardo Bras
2024-06-10 15:10     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-07-03 16:21   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-07-03 17:25     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-07-04 22:18       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-07-05  0:26         ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 7/9] MAINTAINERS: Add Uladzislau Rezki as RCU maintainer Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 8/9] rcu: Eliminate lockless accesses to rcu_sync->gp_count Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-04 22:23 ` [PATCH rcu 9/9] rcu: Fix rcu_barrier() VS post CPUHP_TEARDOWN_CPU invocation 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=ZmBVfpyEZeTIAHJn@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    /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