From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH rcu 1/8] rcu: Remove duplicate RCU exp QS report from rcu_report_dead()
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 15:46:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221019224659.2499511-1-paulmck@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221019224652.GA2499358@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
From: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
The rcu_report_dead() function invokes rcu_report_exp_rdp() in order
to force an immediate expedited quiescent state on the outgoing
CPU, and then it invokes rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() to provide any
required deferred quiescent state of either sort. Because the call to
rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() provides the expedited RCU quiescent state if
requested, the call to rcu_report_exp_rdp() is potentially redundant.
One possible issue is a concurrent start of a new expedited RCU
grace period, but this situation is already handled correctly
by __sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(). This function will detect
that the CPU is going offline via the error return from its call
to smp_call_function_single(). In that case, it will retry, and
eventually stop retrying due to rcu_report_exp_rdp() clearing the
->qsmaskinitnext bit corresponding to the target CPU. As a result,
__sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus() will report the necessary quiescent
state after dealing with any remaining CPU.
This change assumes that control does not enter rcu_report_dead() within
an RCU read-side critical section, but then again, the surviving call
to rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() has always made this assumption.
This commit therefore removes the call to rcu_report_exp_rdp(), thus
relying on rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() to handle both normal and expedited
quiescent states.
Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 6bb8e72bc8151..0ca21ac0f0648 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -4276,8 +4276,6 @@ void rcu_report_dead(unsigned int cpu)
// Do any dangling deferred wakeups.
do_nocb_deferred_wakeup(rdp);
- /* QS for any half-done expedited grace period. */
- rcu_report_exp_rdp(rdp);
rcu_preempt_deferred_qs(current);
/* Remove outgoing CPU from mask in the leaf rcu_node structure. */
--
2.31.1.189.g2e36527f23
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-19 22:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-19 22:46 [PATCH rcu 0/8] Miscellaneous fixes for v6.2 Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 2/8] rcu: Synchronize ->qsmaskinitnext in rcu_boost_kthread_setaffinity() Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 3/8] rcu: Remove unused 'cpu' in rcu_virt_note_context_switch() Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 4/8] rcu: Use READ_ONCE() for lockless read of rnp->qsmask Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 5/8] slab: Explain why SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU reference before locking Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-20 7:10 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-20 16:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-21 7:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-10-21 13:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-21 13:50 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-21 15:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-21 15:50 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-10-21 16:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 6/8] rcu: Remove rcu_is_idle_cpu() Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 7/8] rcu-tasks: Make grace-period-age message human-readable Paul E. McKenney
2022-10-19 22:46 ` [PATCH rcu 8/8] rcu: Fix __this_cpu_read() lockdep warning in rcu_force_quiescent_state() 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=20221019224659.2499511-1-paulmck@kernel.org \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qiang1.zhang@intel.com \
--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