17 Jun, 2011
1 commit
-
The commit "use softirq instead of kthreads except when RCU_BOOST=y"
just applied #ifdef in place. This commit is a cleanup that moves
the newly #ifdef'ed code to the header file kernel/rcutree_plugin.h.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
16 Jun, 2011
1 commit
-
This patch #ifdefs RCU kthreads out of the kernel unless RCU_BOOST=y,
thus eliminating context-switch overhead if RCU priority boosting has
not been configured.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
15 Jun, 2011
2 commits
-
Commit a26ac2455ffcf3(rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread)
introduced performance regression. In an AIM7 test, this commit degraded
performance by about 40%.The commit runs rcu callbacks in a kthread instead of softirq. We observed
high rate of context switch which is caused by this. Out test system has
64 CPUs and HZ is 1000, so we saw more than 64k context switch per second
which is caused by RCU's per-CPU kthread. A trace showed that most of
the time the RCU per-CPU kthread doesn't actually handle any callbacks,
but instead just does a very small amount of work handling grace periods.
This means that RCU's per-CPU kthreads are making the scheduler do quite
a bit of work in order to allow a very small amount of RCU-related
processing to be done.Alex Shi's analysis determined that this slowdown is due to lock
contention within the scheduler. Unfortunately, as Peter Zijlstra points
out, the scheduler's real-time semantics require global action, which
means that this contention is inherent in real-time scheduling. (Yes,
perhaps someone will come up with a workaround -- otherwise, -rt is not
going to do well on large SMP systems -- but this patch will work around
this issue in the meantime. And "the meantime" might well be forever.)This patch therefore re-introduces softirq processing to RCU, but only
for core RCU work. RCU callbacks are still executed in kthread context,
so that only a small amount of RCU work runs in softirq context in the
common case. This should minimize ksoftirqd execution, allowing us to
skip boosting of ksoftirqd for CONFIG_RCU_BOOST=y kernels.Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
Tested-by: "Alex,Shi"
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Make the functions creating the kthreads wake them up. Leverage the
fact that the per-node and boost kthreads can run anywhere, thus
dispensing with the need to wake them up once the incoming CPU has
gone fully online.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Tested-by: Daniel J Blueman
31 May, 2011
1 commit
-
Commit cc3ce5176d83 (rcu: Start RCU kthreads in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
state) fudges a sleeping task' state, resulting in the scheduler seeing
a TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE task going to sleep, but a TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
task waking up. The result is unbalanced load calculation.The problem that patch tried to address is that the RCU threads could
stay in UNINTERRUPTIBLE state for quite a while and triggering the hung
task detector due to on-demand wake-ups.Cure the problem differently by always giving the tasks at least one
wake-up once the CPU is fully up and running, this will kick them out of
the initial UNINTERRUPTIBLE state and into the regular INTERRUPTIBLE
wait state.[ The alternative would be teaching kthread_create() to start threads as
INTERRUPTIBLE but that needs a tad more thought. ]Reported-by: Damien Wyart
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1306755291.1200.2872.camel@twins
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
28 May, 2011
2 commits
-
Upon creation, kthreads are in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state, which can
result in softlockup warnings. Because some of RCU's kthreads can
legitimately be idle indefinitely, start them in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
state in order to avoid those warnings.Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Tested-by: Yinghai Lu
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar -
It is not necessary to use waitqueues for the RCU kthreads because
we always know exactly which thread is to be awakened. In addition,
wake_up() only issues an actual wakeup when there is a thread waiting on
the queue, which was why there was an extra explicit wake_up_process()
to get the RCU kthreads started.Eliminating the waitqueues (and wake_up()) in favor of wake_up_process()
eliminates the need for the initial wake_up_process() and also shrinks
the data structure size a bit. The wakeup logic is placed in a new
rcu_wait() macro.Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
27 May, 2011
1 commit
-
(Note: this was reverted, and is now being re-applied in pieces, with
this being the fifth and final piece. See below for the reason that
it is now felt to be safe to re-apply this.)Commit d09b62d fixed grace-period synchronization, but left some smp_mb()
invocations in rcu_process_callbacks() that are no longer needed, but
sheer paranoia prevented them from being removed. This commit removes
them and provides a proof of correctness in their absence. It also adds
a memory barrier to rcu_report_qs_rsp() immediately before the update to
rsp->completed in order to handle the theoretical possibility that the
compiler or CPU might move massive quantities of code into a lock-based
critical section. This also proves that the sheer paranoia was not
entirely unjustified, at least from a theoretical point of view.In addition, the old dyntick-idle synchronization depended on the fact
that grace periods were many milliseconds in duration, so that it could
be assumed that no dyntick-idle CPU could reorder a memory reference
across an entire grace period. Unfortunately for this design, the
addition of expedited grace periods breaks this assumption, which has
the unfortunate side-effect of requiring atomic operations in the
functions that track dyntick-idle state for RCU. (There is some hope
that the algorithms used in user-level RCU might be applied here, but
some work is required to handle the NMIs that user-space applications
can happily ignore. For the short term, better safe than sorry.)This proof assumes that neither compiler nor CPU will allow a lock
acquisition and release to be reordered, as doing so can result in
deadlock. The proof is as follows:1. A given CPU declares a quiescent state under the protection of
its leaf rcu_node's lock.2. If there is more than one level of rcu_node hierarchy, the
last CPU to declare a quiescent state will also acquire the
->lock of the next rcu_node up in the hierarchy, but only
after releasing the lower level's lock. The acquisition of this
lock clearly cannot occur prior to the acquisition of the leaf
node's lock.3. Step 2 repeats until we reach the root rcu_node structure.
Please note again that only one lock is held at a time through
this process. The acquisition of the root rcu_node's ->lock
must occur after the release of that of the leaf rcu_node.4. At this point, we set the ->completed field in the rcu_state
structure in rcu_report_qs_rsp(). However, if the rcu_node
hierarchy contains only one rcu_node, then in theory the code
preceding the quiescent state could leak into the critical
section. We therefore precede the update of ->completed with a
memory barrier. All CPUs will therefore agree that any updates
preceding any report of a quiescent state will have happened
before the update of ->completed.5. Regardless of whether a new grace period is needed, rcu_start_gp()
will propagate the new value of ->completed to all of the leaf
rcu_node structures, under the protection of each rcu_node's ->lock.
If a new grace period is needed immediately, this propagation
will occur in the same critical section that ->completed was
set in, but courtesy of the memory barrier in #4 above, is still
seen to follow any pre-quiescent-state activity.6. When a given CPU invokes __rcu_process_gp_end(), it becomes
aware of the end of the old grace period and therefore makes
any RCU callbacks that were waiting on that grace period eligible
for invocation.If this CPU is the same one that detected the end of the grace
period, and if there is but a single rcu_node in the hierarchy,
we will still be in the single critical section. In this case,
the memory barrier in step #4 guarantees that all callbacks will
be seen to execute after each CPU's quiescent state.On the other hand, if this is a different CPU, it will acquire
the leaf rcu_node's ->lock, and will again be serialized after
each CPU's quiescent state for the old grace period.On the strength of this proof, this commit therefore removes the memory
barriers from rcu_process_callbacks() and adds one to rcu_report_qs_rsp().
The effect is to reduce the number of memory barriers by one and to
reduce the frequency of execution from about once per scheduling tick
per CPU to once per grace period.This was reverted do to hangs found during testing by Yinghai Lu and
Ingo Molnar. Frederic Weisbecker supplied Yinghai with tracing that
located the underlying problem, and Frederic also provided the fix.The underlying problem was that the HARDIRQ_ENTER() macro from
lib/locking-selftest.c invoked irq_enter(), which in turn invokes
rcu_irq_enter(), but HARDIRQ_EXIT() invoked __irq_exit(), which
does not invoke rcu_irq_exit(). This situation resulted in calls
to rcu_irq_enter() that were not balanced by the required calls to
rcu_irq_exit(). Therefore, after these locking selftests completed,
RCU's dyntick-idle nesting count was a large number (for example,
72), which caused RCU to to conclude that the affected CPU was not in
dyntick-idle mode when in fact it was.RCU would therefore incorrectly wait for this dyntick-idle CPU, resulting
in hangs.In contrast, with Frederic's patch, which replaces the irq_enter()
in HARDIRQ_ENTER() with an __irq_enter(), these tests don't ever call
either rcu_irq_enter() or rcu_irq_exit(), which works because the CPU
running the test is already marked as not being in dyntick-idle mode.
This means that the rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit() calls and RCU
then has no problem working out which CPUs are in dyntick-idle mode and
which are not.The reason that the imbalance was not noticed before the barrier patch
was applied is that the old implementation of rcu_enter_nohz() ignored
the nesting depth. This could still result in delays, but much shorter
ones. Whenever there was a delay, RCU would IPI the CPU with the
unbalanced nesting level, which would eventually result in rcu_enter_nohz()
being called, which in turn would force RCU to see that the CPU was in
dyntick-idle mode.The reason that very few people noticed the problem is that the mismatched
irq_enter() vs. __irq_exit() occured only when the kernel was built with
CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
20 May, 2011
1 commit
-
This reverts commit e59fb3120becfb36b22ddb8bd27d065d3cdca499.
This reversion was due to (extreme) boot-time slowdowns on SPARC seen by
Yinghai Lu and on x86 by Ingo
.
This is a non-trivial reversion due to intervening commits.Conflicts:
Documentation/RCU/trace.txt
kernel/rcutree.cSigned-off-by: Ingo Molnar
08 May, 2011
1 commit
-
Avoid calling into the scheduler while holding core RCU locks. This
allows rcu_read_unlock() to be called while holding the runqueue locks,
but only as long as there was no chance of the RCU read-side critical
section having been preempted. (Otherwise, if RCU priority boosting
is enabled, rcu_read_unlock() might call into the scheduler in order to
unboost itself, which might allows self-deadlock on the runqueue locks
within the scheduler.)Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
06 May, 2011
11 commits
-
The "preemptible" spelling is preferable. May as well fix it.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
Using __rcu_read_lock() in place of rcu_read_lock() leaves any debug
state as it really should be, namely with the lock still held.Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
The rcu_initiate_boost_trace() function mis-attributed refusals to
initiate RCU priority boosting that were in fact due to its not yet
being time to boost. This patch fixes the faulty comparison.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Add tracing to help debugging situations when RCU's kthreads are not
running but are supposed to be.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
Includes total number of tasks boosted, number boosted on behalf of each
of normal and expedited grace periods, and statistics on attempts to
initiate boosting that failed for various reasons.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
The scheduler has had some heartburn in the past when too many real-time
kthreads were affinitied to the outgoing CPU. So, this commit lightens
the load by forcing the per-rcu_node and the boost kthreads off of the
outgoing CPU. Note that RCU's per-CPU kthread remains on the outgoing
CPU until the bitter end, as it must in order to preserve correctness.Also avoid disabling hardirqs across calls to set_cpus_allowed_ptr(),
given that this function can block.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Add priority boosting for TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, similar to that for
TINY_PREEMPT_RCU. This is enabled by the default-off RCU_BOOST
kernel parameter. The priority to which to boost preempted
RCU readers is controlled by the RCU_BOOST_PRIO kernel parameter
(defaulting to real-time priority 1) and the time to wait before
boosting the readers who are blocking a given grace period is
controlled by the RCU_BOOST_DELAY kernel parameter (defaulting to
500 milliseconds).Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
If RCU priority boosting is to be meaningful, callback invocation must
be boosted in addition to preempted RCU readers. Otherwise, in presence
of CPU real-time threads, the grace period ends, but the callbacks don't
get invoked. If the callbacks don't get invoked, the associated memory
doesn't get freed, so the system is still subject to OOM.But it is not reasonable to priority-boost RCU_SOFTIRQ, so this commit
moves the callback invocations to a kthread, which can be boosted easily.Also add comments and properly synchronized all accesses to
rcu_cpu_kthread_task, as suggested by Lai Jiangshan.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
Combine the current TREE_PREEMPT_RCU ->blocked_tasks[] lists in the
rcu_node structure into a single ->blkd_tasks list with ->gp_tasks
and ->exp_tasks tail pointers. This is in preparation for RCU priority
boosting, which will add a third dimension to the combinatorial explosion
in the ->blocked_tasks[] case, but simply a third pointer in the new
->blkd_tasks case.Also update documentation to reflect blocked_tasks[] merge
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
Commit d09b62d fixed grace-period synchronization, but left some smp_mb()
invocations in rcu_process_callbacks() that are no longer needed, but
sheer paranoia prevented them from being removed. This commit removes
them and provides a proof of correctness in their absence. It also adds
a memory barrier to rcu_report_qs_rsp() immediately before the update to
rsp->completed in order to handle the theoretical possibility that the
compiler or CPU might move massive quantities of code into a lock-based
critical section. This also proves that the sheer paranoia was not
entirely unjustified, at least from a theoretical point of view.In addition, the old dyntick-idle synchronization depended on the fact
that grace periods were many milliseconds in duration, so that it could
be assumed that no dyntick-idle CPU could reorder a memory reference
across an entire grace period. Unfortunately for this design, the
addition of expedited grace periods breaks this assumption, which has
the unfortunate side-effect of requiring atomic operations in the
functions that track dyntick-idle state for RCU. (There is some hope
that the algorithms used in user-level RCU might be applied here, but
some work is required to handle the NMIs that user-space applications
can happily ignore. For the short term, better safe than sorry.)This proof assumes that neither compiler nor CPU will allow a lock
acquisition and release to be reordered, as doing so can result in
deadlock. The proof is as follows:1. A given CPU declares a quiescent state under the protection of
its leaf rcu_node's lock.2. If there is more than one level of rcu_node hierarchy, the
last CPU to declare a quiescent state will also acquire the
->lock of the next rcu_node up in the hierarchy, but only
after releasing the lower level's lock. The acquisition of this
lock clearly cannot occur prior to the acquisition of the leaf
node's lock.3. Step 2 repeats until we reach the root rcu_node structure.
Please note again that only one lock is held at a time through
this process. The acquisition of the root rcu_node's ->lock
must occur after the release of that of the leaf rcu_node.4. At this point, we set the ->completed field in the rcu_state
structure in rcu_report_qs_rsp(). However, if the rcu_node
hierarchy contains only one rcu_node, then in theory the code
preceding the quiescent state could leak into the critical
section. We therefore precede the update of ->completed with a
memory barrier. All CPUs will therefore agree that any updates
preceding any report of a quiescent state will have happened
before the update of ->completed.5. Regardless of whether a new grace period is needed, rcu_start_gp()
will propagate the new value of ->completed to all of the leaf
rcu_node structures, under the protection of each rcu_node's ->lock.
If a new grace period is needed immediately, this propagation
will occur in the same critical section that ->completed was
set in, but courtesy of the memory barrier in #4 above, is still
seen to follow any pre-quiescent-state activity.6. When a given CPU invokes __rcu_process_gp_end(), it becomes
aware of the end of the old grace period and therefore makes
any RCU callbacks that were waiting on that grace period eligible
for invocation.If this CPU is the same one that detected the end of the grace
period, and if there is but a single rcu_node in the hierarchy,
we will still be in the single critical section. In this case,
the memory barrier in step #4 guarantees that all callbacks will
be seen to execute after each CPU's quiescent state.On the other hand, if this is a different CPU, it will acquire
the leaf rcu_node's ->lock, and will again be serialized after
each CPU's quiescent state for the old grace period.On the strength of this proof, this commit therefore removes the memory
barriers from rcu_process_callbacks() and adds one to rcu_report_qs_rsp().
The effect is to reduce the number of memory barriers by one and to
reduce the frequency of execution from about once per scheduling tick
per CPU to once per grace period.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
The RCU CPU stall warnings can now be controlled using the
rcu_cpu_stall_suppress boot-time parameter or via the same parameter
from sysfs. There is therefore no longer any reason to have
kernel config parameters for this feature. This commit therefore
removes the RCU_CPU_STALL_DETECTOR and RCU_CPU_STALL_DETECTOR_RUNNABLE
kernel config parameters. The RCU_CPU_STALL_TIMEOUT parameter remains
to allow the timeout to be tuned and the RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE parameter
remains to allow task-stall information to be suppressed if desired.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
18 Dec, 2010
1 commit
-
The fix in commit #6a0cc49 requires more than three concurrent instances
of synchronize_sched_expedited() before batching is possible. This
patch uses a ticket-counter-like approach that is also not unrelated to
Lai Jiangshan's Ring RCU to allow sharing of expedited grace periods even
when there are only two concurrent instances of synchronize_sched_expedited().This commit builds on Tejun's original posting, which may be found at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/9/204, adding memory barriers, avoiding
overflow of signed integers (other than via atomic_t), and fixing the
detection of batching.Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
30 Nov, 2010
4 commits
-
The new (early 2010) implementation of synchronize_sched_expedited() uses
try_stop_cpu() to force a context switch on every CPU. It also permits
concurrent calls to synchronize_sched_expedited() to share a single call
to try_stop_cpu() through use of an atomically incremented
synchronize_sched_expedited_count variable. Unfortunately, this is
subject to failure as follows:o Task A invokes synchronize_sched_expedited(), try_stop_cpus()
succeeds, but Task A is preempted before getting to the atomic
increment of synchronize_sched_expedited_count.o Task B also invokes synchronize_sched_expedited(), with exactly
the same outcome as Task A.o Task C also invokes synchronize_sched_expedited(), again with
exactly the same outcome as Tasks A and B.o Task D also invokes synchronize_sched_expedited(), but only
gets as far as acquiring the mutex within try_stop_cpus()
before being preempted, interrupted, or otherwise delayed.o Task E also invokes synchronize_sched_expedited(), but only
gets to the snapshotting of synchronize_sched_expedited_count.o Tasks A, B, and C all increment synchronize_sched_expedited_count.
o Task E fails to get the mutex, so checks the new value
of synchronize_sched_expedited_count. It finds that the
value has increased, so (wrongly) assumes that its work
has been done, returning despite there having been no
expedited grace period since it began.The solution is to have the lowest-numbered CPU atomically increment
the synchronize_sched_expedited_count variable within the
synchronize_sched_expedited_cpu_stop() function, which is under
the protection of the mutex acquired by try_stop_cpus(). However, this
also requires that piggybacking tasks wait for three rather than two
instances of try_stop_cpu(), because we cannot control the order in
which the per-CPU callback function occur.Cc: Tejun Heo
Cc: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Lai's RCU-callback immediate-adoption patch changes the RCU tracing
output, so update tracing.txt. Also update a few comments to clarify
the synchronization design.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
When we handle the CPU_DYING notifier, the whole system is stopped except
for the current CPU. We therefore need no synchronization with the other
CPUs. This allows us to move any orphaned RCU callbacks directly to the
list of any online CPU without needing to run them through the global
orphan lists. These global orphan lists can therefore be dispensed with.
This commit makes thes changes, though currently victimizes CPU 0 @@@.Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The first version of synchronize_sched_expedited() used the migration
code in the scheduler, and was therefore implemented in kernel/sched.c.
However, the more recent version of this code no longer uses the
migration code, so this commit moves it to the main RCU source files.Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
03 Sep, 2010
1 commit
-
CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE depends on CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, but
rcu_bootup_announce_oddness() complains if CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE
is not set even in the case of CONFIG_TREE_RCU. This commit therefore
fixes rcu_bootup_announce_oddness() to avoid insisting on impossibilities.Reported-by: Guy Martin
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
21 Aug, 2010
3 commits
-
Replace one of the ACCESS_ONCE() calls in each of __rcu_read_lock()
and __rcu_read_unlock() with barrier() as suggested by Steve Rostedt in
order to avoid the potential compiler-optimization-induced bug noted by
Mathieu Desnoyers.Located-by: Mathieu Desnoyers
Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU kernel configuration parameter was recently
re-introduced, but as an indication of the type of RCU (preemptible
vs. non-preemptible) instead of as selecting a given implementation.
This commit uses CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU to combine duplicate code
from include/linux/rcutiny.h and include/linux/rcutree.h into
include/linux/rcupdate.h. This commit also combines a few other pieces
of duplicate code that have accumulated.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
When using a kernel debugger, a long sojourn in the debugger can get
you lots of RCU CPU stall warnings once you resume. This might not be
helpful, especially if you are using the system console. This patch
therefore allows RCU CPU stall warnings to be suppressed, but only for
the duration of the current set of grace periods.This differs from Jason's original patch in that it adds support for
tiny RCU and preemptible RCU, and uses a slightly different method for
suppressing the RCU CPU stall warning messages.Signed-off-by: Jason Wessel
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Tested-by: Jason Wessel
20 Aug, 2010
2 commits
-
Make it explicit that new RCU read-side critical sections that start
after call_rcu() and synchronize_rcu() start might still be running
after the end of the relevant grace period.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
&percpu_data is compatible with allocated percpu data.
And we use it and remove the "->rda[NR_CPUS]" array, saving significant
storage on systems with large numbers of CPUs. This does add an additional
level of indirection and thus an additional cache line referenced, but
because ->rda is not used on the read side, this is OK.Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
Reviewed-by: Tejun Heo
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
12 May, 2010
1 commit
-
Remove all rcu head inits. We don't care about the RCU head state before passing
it to call_rcu() anyway. Only leave the "on_stack" variants so debugobjects can
keep track of objects on stack.Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
11 May, 2010
5 commits
-
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
The current version of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ reproduces the old CLASSIC_RCU
dyntick-idle bug, as it fails to detect CPUs that have interrupted
or NMIed out of dyntick-idle mode. Fix this by making rcu_needs_cpu()
check the state in the per-CPU rcu_dynticks variables, thus correctly
detecting the dyntick-idle state from an RCU perspective.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
Print boot-time messages if tracing is enabled, if fanout is set
to non-default values, if exact fanout is specified, if accelerated
dyntick-idle grace periods have been enabled, if RCU-lockdep is enabled,
if rcutorture has been boot-time enabled, if the CPU stall detector has
been disabled, or if four-level hierarchy has been enabled.This is all for TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU. TINY_RCU will be handled
separately, if at all.Suggested-by: Josh Triplett
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The addition of preemptible RCU to treercu resulted in a bit of
confusion and inefficiency surrounding the handling of context switches
for RCU-sched and for RCU-preempt. For RCU-sched, a context switch
is a quiescent state, pure and simple, just like it always has been.
For RCU-preempt, a context switch is in no way a quiescent state, but
special handling is required when a task blocks in an RCU read-side
critical section.However, the callout from the scheduler and the outer loop in ksoftirqd
still calls something named rcu_sched_qs(), whose name is no longer
accurate. Furthermore, when rcu_check_callbacks() notes an RCU-sched
quiescent state, it ends up unnecessarily (though harmlessly, aside
from the performance hit) enqueuing the current task if it happens to
be running in an RCU-preempt read-side critical section. This not only
increases the maximum latency of scheduler_tick(), it also needlessly
increases the overhead of the next outermost rcu_read_unlock() invocation.This patch addresses this situation by separating the notion of RCU's
context-switch handling from that of RCU-sched's quiescent states.
The context-switch handling is covered by rcu_note_context_switch() in
general and by rcu_preempt_note_context_switch() for preemptible RCU.
This permits rcu_sched_qs() to handle quiescent states and only quiescent
states. It also reduces the maximum latency of scheduler_tick(), though
probably by much less than a microsecond. Finally, it means that tasks
within preemptible-RCU read-side critical sections avoid incurring the
overhead of queuing unless there really is a context switch.Suggested-by: Lai Jiangshan
Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Cc: Ingo Molnar
Cc: Peter Zijlstra -
Offline CPUs are not in nohz_cpu_mask, but can be ignored when checking
for the last non-dyntick-idle CPU. This patch therefore only checks
online CPUs for not being dyntick idle, allowing fast entry into
full-system dyntick-idle state even when there are some offline CPUs.Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
28 Feb, 2010
1 commit
-
Make the holdoff only happen when the full number of attempts
have been made.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference:
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
27 Feb, 2010
1 commit
-
This patch disables irqs across the call to rcu_needs_cpu(). It
also enforces a hold-off period so that the idle loop doesn't
softirq itself to death when there are lots of RCU callbacks in
flight on the last non-dynticked CPU.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference:
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar