12 Dec, 2011
15 commits
-
Both TINY_RCU's and TREE_RCU's implementations of rcu_boost() access
the ->boost_tasks and ->exp_tasks fields without preventing concurrent
changes to these fields. This commit therefore applies ACCESS_ONCE in
order to prevent compiler mischief.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
This reverts commit 5342e269b2b58ee0b0b4168a94087faaa60d0567.
The approach taken in this patch was deemed too abusive to mutexes,
and thus too likely to result in maintenance problems in the future.
Instead, we will disallow RCU read-side critical sections that partially
overlap with interrupt-disbled code segments.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
If there are other CPUs active at a given point in time, then there is a
limit to what a given CPU can do to advance the current RCU grace period.
Beyond this limit, attempting to force the RCU grace period forward will
do nothing but consume energy burning CPU cycles.Therefore, this commit takes an adaptive approach to RCU_FAST_NO_HZ
preparations for idle. It pushes the RCU core state machine for
two cycles unconditionally, and then it will push from zero to three
additional cycles, but only as long as the RCU core has work for this
CPU to do immediately. The rcu_pending() function is used to check
whether the RCU core has such work.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The rcu_do_batch() function that invokes callbacks for TREE_RCU and
TREE_PREEMPT_RCU normally throttles callback invocation to avoid degrading
scheduling latency. However, as long as the CPU would otherwise be idle,
there is no downside to continuing to invoke any callbacks that have passed
through their grace periods. In fact, processing such callbacks in a
timely manner has the benefit of increasing the probability that the
CPU can enter the power-saving dyntick-idle mode.Therefore, this commit allows callback invocation to continue beyond the
preset limit as long as the scheduler does not have some other task to
run and as long as context is that of the idle task or the relevant
RCU kthread.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The current implementation of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ prevents CPUs from entering
dyntick-idle state if they have RCU callbacks pending. Unfortunately,
this has the side-effect of often preventing them from entering this
state, especially if at least one other CPU is not in dyntick-idle state.
However, the resulting per-tick wakeup is wasteful in many cases: if the
CPU has already fully responded to the current RCU grace period, there
will be nothing for it to do until this grace period ends, which will
frequently take several jiffies.This commit therefore permits a CPU that has done everything that the
current grace period has asked of it (rcu_pending() == 0) even if it
still as RCU callbacks pending. However, such a CPU posts a timer to
wake it up several jiffies later (6 jiffies, based on experience with
grace-period lengths). This wakeup is required to handle situations
that can result in all CPUs being in dyntick-idle mode, thus failing
to ever complete the current grace period. If a CPU wakes up before
the timer goes off, then it cancels that timer, thus avoiding spurious
wakeups.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Re-enable interrupts across calls to quiescent-state functions and
also across force_quiescent_state() to reduce latency.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
With the new implementation of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ, it was possible to hang
RCU grace periods as follows:o CPU 0 attempts to go idle, cycles several times through the
rcu_prepare_for_idle() loop, then goes dyntick-idle when
RCU needs nothing more from it, while still having at least
on RCU callback pending.o CPU 1 goes idle with no callbacks.
Both CPUs can then stay in dyntick-idle mode indefinitely, preventing
the RCU grace period from ever completing, possibly hanging the system.This commit therefore prevents CPUs that have RCU callbacks from entering
dyntick-idle mode. This approach also eliminates the need for the
end-of-grace-period IPIs used previously.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
If a CPU enters dyntick-idle mode with callbacks pending, it will need
an IPI at the end of the grace period. However, if it exits dyntick-idle
mode before the grace period ends, it will be needlessly IPIed at the
end of the grace period.Therefore, this commit clears the per-CPU rcu_awake_at_gp_end flag
when a CPU determines that it does not need it. This in turn requires
disabling interrupts across much of rcu_prepare_for_idle() in order to
avoid having nested interrupts clearing this state out from under us.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The earlier version would attempt to push callbacks through five times
before going into dyntick-idle mode if callbacks remained, but the CPU
had done all that it needed to do for the current RCU grace periods.
This is wasteful: In most cases, once the CPU has done all that it
needs to for the current RCU grace periods, it will make no further
progress on the callbacks no matter how many times it loops through
the RCU core processing and the idle-entry code.This commit therefore goes to dyntick-idle mode whenever the current
CPU has done all it can for the current grace period.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
This commit adds trace_rcu_prep_idle(), which is invoked from
rcu_prepare_for_idle() and rcu_wake_cpu() to trace attempts on
the part of RCU to force CPUs into dyntick-idle mode.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Currently, RCU does not permit a CPU to enter dyntick-idle mode if that
CPU has any RCU callbacks queued. This means that workloads for which
each CPU wakes up and does some RCU updates every few ticks will never
enter dyntick-idle mode. This can result in significant unnecessary power
consumption, so this patch permits a given to enter dyntick-idle mode if
it has callbacks, but only if that same CPU has completed all current
work for the RCU core. We determine use rcu_pending() to determine
whether a given CPU has completed all current work for the RCU core.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Empty void functions do not need "return", so this commit removes it
from rcu_report_exp_rnp().Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
When setting up an expedited grace period, if there were no readers, the
task will awaken itself. This commit removes this useless self-awakening.Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
When synchronize_sched_expedited() takes its second and subsequent
snapshots of sync_sched_expedited_started, it subtracts 1. This
means that the concurrent caller of synchronize_sched_expedited()
that incremented to that value sees our successful completion, it
will not be able to take advantage of it. This restriction is
pointless, given that our full expedited grace period would have
happened after the other guy started, and thus should be able to
serve as a proxy for the other guy successfully executing
try_stop_cpus().This commit therefore removes the subtraction of 1.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett -
Because rcu_read_unlock_special() samples rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp)
after dropping rnp->lock, the following sequence of events is possible:1. Task A exits its RCU read-side critical section, and removes
itself from the ->blkd_tasks list, releases rnp->lock, and is
then preempted. Task B remains on the ->blkd_tasks list, and
blocks the current expedited grace period.2. Task B exits from its RCU read-side critical section and removes
itself from the ->blkd_tasks list. Because it is the last task
blocking the current expedited grace period, it ends that
expedited grace period.3. Task A resumes, and samples rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp) which
of course indicates that nothing is blocking the nonexistent
expedited grace period. Task A is again preempted.4. Some other CPU starts an expedited grace period. There are several
tasks blocking this expedited grace period queued on the
same rcu_node structure that Task A was using in step 1 above.5. Task A examines its state and incorrectly concludes that it was
the last task blocking the expedited grace period on the current
rcu_node structure. It therefore reports completion up the
rcu_node tree.6. The expedited grace period can then incorrectly complete before
the tasks blocked on this same rcu_node structure exit their
RCU read-side critical sections. Arbitrarily bad things happen.This commit therefore takes a snapshot of rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp)
prior to dropping the lock, so that only the last task thinks that it is
the last task, thus avoiding the failure scenario laid out above.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
29 Sep, 2011
14 commits
-
The purpose of rcu_needs_cpu_flush() was to iterate on pushing the
current grace period in order to help the current CPU enter dyntick-idle
mode. However, this can result in failures if the CPU starts entering
dyntick-idle mode, but then backs out. In this case, the call to
rcu_pending() from rcu_needs_cpu_flush() might end up announcing a
non-existing quiescent state.This commit therefore removes rcu_needs_cpu_flush() in favor of letting
the dyntick-idle machinery at the end of the softirq handler push the
loop along via its call to rcu_pending().Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
RCU boost threads start life at RCU_BOOST_PRIO, while others remain
at RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO. While here, change thread names to match other
kthreads, and adjust rcu_yield() to not override the priority set by
the user. This last change sets the stage for runtime changes to
priority in the -rt tree.Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Create a separate lockdep class for the rt_mutex used for RCU priority
boosting and enable use of rt_mutex_lock() with irqs disabled. This
prevents RCU priority boosting from falling prey to deadlocks when
someone begins an RCU read-side critical section in preemptible state,
but releases it with an irq-disabled lock held.Unfortunately, the scheduler's runqueue and priority-inheritance locks
still must either completely enclose or be completely enclosed by any
overlapping RCU read-side critical section.This version removes a redundant local_irq_restore() noted by
Yong Zhang.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
It is possible for an RCU CPU stall to end just as it is detected, in
which case the current code will uselessly dump all CPU's stacks.
This commit therefore checks for this condition and refrains from
sending needless NMIs.And yes, the stall might also end just after we checked all CPUs and
tasks, but in that case we would at least have given some clue as
to which CPU/task was at fault.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
Commit 7765be (Fix RCU_BOOST race handling current->rcu_read_unlock_special)
introduced a new ->rcu_boosted field in the task structure. This is
redundant because the existing ->rcu_boost_mutex will be non-NULL at
any time that ->rcu_boosted is nonzero. Therefore, this commit removes
->rcu_boosted and tests ->rcu_boost_mutex instead.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
We only need to constrain the compiler if we are actually exiting
the top-level RCU read-side critical section. This commit therefore
moves the first barrier() cal in __rcu_read_unlock() to inside the
"if" statement, thus avoiding needless register flushes for inner
rcu_read_unlock() calls.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
There is often a delay between the time that a CPU passes through a
quiescent state and the time that this quiescent state is reported to the
RCU core. It is quite possible that the grace period ended before the
quiescent state could be reported, for example, some other CPU might have
deduced that this CPU passed through dyntick-idle mode. It is critically
important that quiescent state be counted only against the grace period
that was in effect at the time that the quiescent state was detected.Previously, this was handled by recording the number of the last grace
period to complete when passing through a quiescent state. The RCU
core then checks this number against the current value, and rejects
the quiescent state if there is a mismatch. However, one additional
possibility must be accounted for, namely that the quiescent state was
recorded after the prior grace period completed but before the current
grace period started. In this case, the RCU core must reject the
quiescent state, but the recorded number will match. This is handled
when the CPU becomes aware of a new grace period -- at that point,
it invalidates any prior quiescent state.This works, but is a bit indirect. The new approach records the current
grace period, and the RCU core checks to see (1) that this is still the
current grace period and (2) that this grace period has not yet ended.
This approach simplifies reasoning about correctness, and this commit
changes over to this new approach.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Add trace events to record grace-period start and end, quiescent states,
CPUs noticing grace-period start and end, grace-period initialization,
call_rcu() invocation, tasks blocking in RCU read-side critical sections,
tasks exiting those same critical sections, force_quiescent_state()
detection of dyntick-idle and offline CPUs, CPUs entering and leaving
dyntick-idle mode (except from NMIs), CPUs coming online and going
offline, and CPUs being kicked for staying in dyntick-idle mode for too
long (as in many weeks, even on 32-bit systems).Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenneyrcu: Add the rcu flavor to callback trace events
The earlier trace events for registering RCU callbacks and for invoking
them did not include the RCU flavor (rcu_bh, rcu_preempt, or rcu_sched).
This commit adds the RCU flavor to those trace events.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
Add event-trace markers to TREE_RCU kthreads to allow including these
kthread's CPU time in the utilization calculations.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
We now have kthreads only for flavors of RCU that support boosting,
so update the now-misleading comments accordingly.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
In order to allow event tracing to distinguish between flavors of
RCU, we need those names in the relevant RCU data structures. TINY_RCU
has avoided them for memory-footprint reasons, so add them only if
CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Pull the code that waits for an RCU grace period into a single function,
which is then called by synchronize_rcu() and friends in the case of
TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, and from rcu_barrier() and friends in
the case of TINY_RCU and TINY_PREEMPT_RCU.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
-
There are a number of cases where the RCU can find additional work
for the per-CPU kthread within the context of that per-CPU kthread.
In such cases, the per-CPU kthread is already running, so attempting
to wake itself up does nothing except waste CPU cycles. This commit
therefore checks to see if it is in the per-CPU kthread context,
omitting the wakeup in this case.Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
Commit a26ac2455ffc (move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread) added
per-CPU kthreads. However, kthread creation uses kthread_create(), which
can put the kthread's stack and task struct on the wrong NUMA node.
Therefore, use kthread_create_on_node() instead of kthread_create()
so that the stacks and task structs are placed on the correct NUMA node.A similar change was carried out in commit 94dcf29a11b3 (kthread:
use kthread_create_on_node()).Also change rcutorture's priority-boost-test kthread creation.
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet
CC: Tejun Heo
CC: Rusty Russell
CC: Andrew Morton
CC: Andi Kleen
CC: Ingo Molnar
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
21 Jul, 2011
2 commits
-
The rcu_read_unlock_special() function relies on in_irq() to exclude
scheduler activity from interrupt level. This fails because exit_irq()
can invoke the scheduler after clearing the preempt_count() bits that
in_irq() uses to determine that it is at interrupt level. This situation
can result in failures as follows:$task IRQ SoftIRQ
rcu_read_lock()
/* do stuff */
|= UNLOCK_BLOCKED
rcu_read_unlock()
--t->rcu_read_lock_nestingirq_enter();
/* do stuff, don't use RCU */
irq_exit();
sub_preempt_count(IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET);
invoke_softirq()ttwu();
spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock)
rcu_read_lock();
/* do stuff */
rcu_read_unlock();
rcu_read_unlock_special()
rcu_report_exp_rnp()
ttwu()
spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) /* deadlock */rcu_read_unlock_special(t);
Ed can simply trigger this 'easy' because invoke_softirq() immediately
does a ttwu() of ksoftirqd/# instead of doing the in-place softirq stuff
first, but even without that the above happens.Cure this by also excluding softirqs from the
rcu_read_unlock_special() handler and ensuring the force_irqthreads
ksoftirqd/# wakeup is done from full softirq context.[ Alternatively, delaying the ->rcu_read_lock_nesting decrement
until after the special handling would make the thing more robust
in the face of interrupts as well. And there is a separate patch
for that. ]Cc: Thomas Gleixner
Reported-and-tested-by: Ed Tomlinson
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney -
The addition of RCU read-side critical sections within runqueue and
priority-inheritance lock critical sections introduced some deadlock
cycles, for example, involving interrupts from __rcu_read_unlock()
where the interrupt handlers call wake_up(). This situation can cause
the instance of __rcu_read_unlock() invoked from interrupt to do some
of the processing that would otherwise have been carried out by the
task-level instance of __rcu_read_unlock(). When the interrupt-level
instance of __rcu_read_unlock() is called with a scheduler lock held
from interrupt-entry/exit situations where in_irq() returns false,
deadlock can result.This commit resolves these deadlocks by using negative values of
the per-task ->rcu_read_lock_nesting counter to indicate that an
instance of __rcu_read_unlock() is in flight, which in turn prevents
instances from interrupt handlers from doing any special processing.
This patch is inspired by Steven Rostedt's earlier patch that similarly
made __rcu_read_unlock() guard against interrupt-mediated recursion
(see https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/15/326), but this commit refines
Steven's approach to avoid the need for preemption disabling on the
__rcu_read_unlock() fastpath and to also avoid the need for manipulating
a separate per-CPU variable.This patch avoids need for preempt_disable() by instead using negative
values of the per-task ->rcu_read_lock_nesting counter. Note that nested
rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() pairs are still permitted, but they will
never see ->rcu_read_lock_nesting go to zero, and will therefore never
invoke rcu_read_unlock_special(), thus preventing them from seeing the
RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit should it be set in ->rcu_read_unlock_special.
This patch also adds a check for ->rcu_read_unlock_special being negative
in rcu_check_callbacks(), thus preventing the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS
bit from being set should a scheduling-clock interrupt occur while
__rcu_read_unlock() is exiting from an outermost RCU read-side critical
section.Of course, __rcu_read_unlock() can be preempted during the time that
->rcu_read_lock_nesting is negative. This could result in the setting
of the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit after __rcu_read_unlock() checks it,
and would also result it this task being queued on the corresponding
rcu_node structure's blkd_tasks list. Therefore, some later RCU read-side
critical section would enter rcu_read_unlock_special() to clean up --
which could result in deadlock if that critical section happened to be in
the scheduler where the runqueue or priority-inheritance locks were held.This situation is dealt with by making rcu_preempt_note_context_switch()
check for negative ->rcu_read_lock_nesting, thus refraining from
queuing the task (and from setting RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED) if we are
already exiting from the outermost RCU read-side critical section (in
other words, we really are no longer actually in that RCU read-side
critical section). In addition, rcu_preempt_note_context_switch()
invokes rcu_read_unlock_special() to carry out the cleanup in this case,
which clears out the ->rcu_read_unlock_special bits and dequeues the task
(if necessary), in turn avoiding needless delay of the current RCU grace
period and needless RCU priority boosting.It is still illegal to call rcu_read_unlock() while holding a scheduler
lock if the prior RCU read-side critical section has ever had either
preemption or irqs enabled. However, the common use case is legal,
namely where then entire RCU read-side critical section executes with
irqs disabled, for example, when the scheduler lock is held across the
entire lifetime of the RCU read-side critical section.Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
20 Jul, 2011
3 commits
-
Given some common flag combinations, particularly -Os, gcc will inline
rcu_read_unlock_special() despite its being in an unlikely() clause.
Use noinline to prohibit this misoptimization.In addition, move the second barrier() in __rcu_read_unlock() so that
it is not on the common-case code path. This will allow the compiler to
generate better code for the common-case path through __rcu_read_unlock().Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Acked-by: Mathieu Desnoyers -
The RCU_BOOST commits for TREE_PREEMPT_RCU introduced an other-task
write to a new RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED bit in the task_struct structure's
->rcu_read_unlock_special field, but, as noted by Steven Rostedt, without
correctly synchronizing all accesses to ->rcu_read_unlock_special.
This could result in bits in ->rcu_read_unlock_special being spuriously
set and cleared due to conflicting accesses, which in turn could result
in deadlocks between the rcu_node structure's ->lock and the scheduler's
rq and pi locks. These deadlocks would result from RCU incorrectly
believing that the just-ended RCU read-side critical section had been
preempted and/or boosted. If that RCU read-side critical section was
executed with either rq or pi locks held, RCU's ensuing (incorrect)
calls to the scheduler would cause the scheduler to attempt to once
again acquire the rq and pi locks, resulting in deadlock. More complex
deadlock cycles are also possible, involving multiple rq and pi locks
as well as locks from multiple rcu_node structures.This commit fixes synchronization by creating ->rcu_boosted field in
task_struct that is accessed and modified only when holding the ->lock
in the rcu_node structure on which the task is queued (on that rcu_node
structure's ->blkd_tasks list). This results in tasks accessing only
their own current->rcu_read_unlock_special fields, making unsynchronized
access once again legal, and keeping the rcu_read_unlock() fastpath free
of atomic instructions and memory barriers.The reason that the rcu_read_unlock() fastpath does not need to access
the new current->rcu_boosted field is that this new field cannot
be non-zero unless the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit is set in the
current->rcu_read_unlock_special field. Therefore, rcu_read_unlock()
need only test current->rcu_read_unlock_special: if that is zero, then
current->rcu_boosted must also be zero.This bug does not affect TINY_PREEMPT_RCU because this implementation
of RCU accesses current->rcu_read_unlock_special with irqs disabled,
thus preventing races on the !SMP systems that TINY_PREEMPT_RCU runs on.Maybe-reported-by: Dave Jones
Maybe-reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
Reported-by: Steven Rostedt
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt -
PREEMPT_RCU read-side critical sections blocking an expedited grace
period invoke rcu_report_exp_rnp(). When the last such critical section
has completed, rcu_report_exp_rnp() invokes the scheduler to wake up the
task that invoked synchronize_rcu_expedited() -- needlessly holding the
root rcu_node structure's lock while doing so, thus needlessly providing
a way for RCU and the scheduler to deadlock.This commit therefore releases the root rcu_node structure's lock before
calling wake_up().Reported-by: Ed Tomlinson
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
13 Jul, 2011
1 commit
-
Under some rare but real combinations of configuration parameters, RCU
callbacks are posted during early boot that use kernel facilities that
are not yet initialized. Therefore, when these callbacks are invoked,
hard hangs and crashes ensue. This commit therefore prevents RCU
callbacks from being invoked until after the scheduler is fully up and
running, as in after multiple tasks have been spawned.It might well turn out that a better approach is to identify the specific
RCU callbacks that are causing this problem, but that discussion will
wait until such time as someone really needs an RCU callback to be invoked
(as opposed to merely registered) during early boot.Reported-by: julie Sullivan
Reported-by: RKK
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Tested-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Tested-by: julie Sullivan
Tested-by: RKK
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
