public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au, maddy@linux.ibm.com,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] powerpc: Enable dynamic preemption
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 22:27:07 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b73b5143-1a7f-4032-ac06-43db3bf4abea@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250130145409.D_so_mR1@linutronix.de>



On 1/30/25 20:24, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2025-01-06 10:49:19 [+0530], Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/interrupt.c

> 

Thanks for taking a look.

>> +
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
>>   DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(interrupt_exit_not_reentrant);
>>   static inline bool exit_must_hard_disable(void)
>> @@ -396,7 +400,7 @@ notrace unsigned long interrupt_exit_kernel_prepare(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>   		/* Returning to a kernel context with local irqs enabled. */
>>   		WARN_ON_ONCE(!(regs->msr & MSR_EE));
>>   again:
>> -		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPTION)) {
>> +		if (preempt_model_preemptible()) {
> 
> CONFIG_HAVE_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC_KEY is the only option, right? Wouldn't
> 
> | #DEFINE need_irq_preemption() \
> |          (static_branch_unlikely(&sk_dynamic_irqentry_exit_cond_resched))
> |
> | 	if (need_irq_preemption()) {
> 
> be a bit smaller/ quicker? This could be a fast path ;)

I am okay with either way. I did try both[1], there wasn't any significant difference,
hence chose a simpler one. May be system size, workload pattern might matter.

Let me do some more testing to see which one wins.
Is there any specific benchmark which might help here?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/b98b7795-070a-4d9c-9599-445c2ff55fd7@linux.ibm.com/

> 
>>   			/* Return to preemptible kernel context */
>>   			if (unlikely(read_thread_flags() & _TIF_NEED_RESCHED)) {
>>   				if (preempt_count() == 0)
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
>> index edf5cabe5dfd..2556fa8ec019 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
>> @@ -266,7 +266,11 @@ static int __die(const char *str, struct pt_regs *regs, long err)
>>   	printk("%s PAGE_SIZE=%luK%s%s%s%s%s%s %s\n",
>>   	       IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? "LE" : "BE",
>>   	       PAGE_SIZE / 1024, get_mmu_str(),
>> -	       IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT) ? " PREEMPT" : "",
>> +	       preempt_model_none()      ? "none" :
>> +	       preempt_model_voluntary() ? "voluntary" :
>> +	       preempt_model_full()      ? "full" :
>> +	       preempt_model_lazy()      ? "lazy" :
>> +	       "",
> 
> So intend to rework this part. I have patches stashed at
> 	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bigeasy/staging.git/log/?h=preemption_string
> 
> which I didn't sent yet due to the merge window. Just a heads up ;)

Makes sense. I had seen at-least two places where this code was there, ftrace/powerpc.
There were way more places..

You want me to remove this part?

> 
>>   	       IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) ? " SMP" : "",
>>   	       IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP) ? (" NR_CPUS=" __stringify(NR_CPUS)) : "",
>>   	       debug_pagealloc_enabled() ? " DEBUG_PAGEALLOC" : "",
> 
> Sebastian


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-01-30 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-06  5:19 [PATCH v3 0/1] powerpc: Enable dynamic preemption Shrikanth Hegde
2025-01-06  5:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Shrikanth Hegde
2025-01-30 14:54   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-01-30 15:03     ` Christophe Leroy
2025-01-30 16:14       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-01-30 16:57     ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-01-30 20:26       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-01-31  6:09         ` Christophe Leroy
2025-01-31  6:54           ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-01-21  7:25 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] " Shrikanth Hegde

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=b73b5143-1a7f-4032-ac06-43db3bf4abea@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@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