From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/4] rcu/nocb: Consolidate rcu_nocb_cpu_offload/deoffload functions
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2026 16:32:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aahQhlPp3Qqm4Bwg@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260224230435.3390963-2-joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
Le Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 06:04:32PM -0500, Joel Fernandes a écrit :
> The rcu_nocb_cpu_offload() and rcu_nocb_cpu_deoffload() functions are
> nearly duplicates.
>
> Therefore, extract the common logic into rcu_nocb_cpu_toggle_offload()
> which takes an 'offload' boolean, and make both exported functions
> simple wrappers.
>
> This eliminates a bunch of duplicate code at the call sites, namely
> mutex locking, CPU hotplug locking and CPU online checks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> index b3337c7231cc..5b041134d6bb 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
> @@ -1081,30 +1081,6 @@ static int rcu_nocb_rdp_deoffload(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -int rcu_nocb_cpu_deoffload(int cpu)
> -{
> - struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
> - int ret = 0;
> -
> - cpus_read_lock();
> - mutex_lock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
> - if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
> - if (!cpu_online(cpu)) {
> - ret = rcu_nocb_rdp_deoffload(rdp);
> - if (!ret)
> - cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, rcu_nocb_mask);
> - } else {
> - pr_info("NOCB: Cannot CB-deoffload online CPU %d\n", rdp->cpu);
> - ret = -EINVAL;
> - }
> - }
> - mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
> - cpus_read_unlock();
> -
> - return ret;
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_nocb_cpu_deoffload);
> -
> static bool rcu_nocb_rdp_offload_wait_cond(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
> @@ -1149,27 +1125,54 @@ static int rcu_nocb_rdp_offload(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/* Common helper for CPU offload/deoffload operations. */
> +static int rcu_nocb_cpu_toggle_offload(int cpu, bool offload)
> +{
> + struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
> + bool currently_offloaded;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + cpus_read_lock();
> + mutex_lock(&rcu_state.nocb_mutex);
> +
> + currently_offloaded = rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp);
Do we really need that extra variable?
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
--
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-04 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-24 23:04 [PATCH RFC v1 0/4] rcu/nocb: Clean ups and rcutorture test configs Joel Fernandes
2026-02-24 23:04 ` [PATCH RFC v1 1/4] rcu/nocb: Consolidate rcu_nocb_cpu_offload/deoffload functions Joel Fernandes
2026-03-04 15:32 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2026-03-04 17:05 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-02-24 23:04 ` [PATCH RFC v1 2/4] rcu/nocb: Extract nocb_bypass_needs_flush() to reduce duplication Joel Fernandes
2026-03-11 12:58 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-24 23:04 ` [PATCH RFC v1 3/4] rcutorture: Add NOCB01 config for RCU_LAZY torture testing Joel Fernandes
2026-03-11 13:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-24 23:04 ` [PATCH RFC v1 4/4] rcutorture: Add NOCB02 config for nocb poll mode testing Joel Fernandes
2026-02-25 21:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-02-26 0:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2026-03-11 13:03 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=aahQhlPp3Qqm4Bwg@localhost.localdomain \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.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