From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [RFC] jiffies_till_first_fqs off by 1
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 21:06:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251224020619.GA1297269@joelbox2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f95e414-7d0e-4e2a-9656-25abf84c27ec@paulmck-laptop>
Hi Paul,
On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 03:53:23PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 12:38:19PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > During studying some synchronize_rcu() latencies, I found that the
> > jiffies_till_first_fqs value passed to the timer tick subsystem does is always
> > off by one. This is natural due to calc_index() rounding up.
> >
> > For example, jiffies_till_first_fqs=3 means the "Jiffies till first FQS" delay
> > is actually 4ms. And same for the next FQS. In fact, in testing it shows it can
> > never ever be 3ms for HZ=1000. And in rare cases, it will go to 5ms probably due
> > to interrupts.
> >
> > Considering this, I think it is better to reduce the jiffies_till_first_fqs by 1
> > before passing it to the wait APIs.
> >
> > But before I wanted to send a patch, I wanted to get everyone's thoughts.
> > Considering this the RFC.
>
> Inadvertent passing of the value zero?
This should not be an issue because at the moment, even a value of
jiffies_till_first_fqs == 0 waits for ~1 jiffie due to schedule_timeout(0).
But you raise a good point, we should cap the minimum allowed jiffie value
for the fqs parameters to 1 so that we don't pass schedule_timeout() with
negative values when/if we do the reduce-by-one approach.
thanks,
- Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-24 2:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-23 17:38 [RFC] jiffies_till_first_fqs off by 1 Joel Fernandes
2025-12-23 23:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-12-24 2:06 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2025-12-25 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-12-26 2:15 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-01 22:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-01-02 2:59 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-02 3:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-01-02 17:58 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-01-02 19:50 ` 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=20251224020619.GA1297269@joelbox2 \
--to=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=urezki@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