Clear the syscalls hook of a task when it's scheduled out so that if
the task migrates, it doesn't run the syscall slow path on a CPU
that might not need it.

Also set the syscalls hook on the next task if needed.
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

By default we don't want to enter into RCU extended quiescent
state while in userspace because doing this produces some overhead
(eg: use of syscall slowpath). Set it off by default and ready to
run when some feature like adaptive tickless need it.
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Allow calls to rcu_user_enter() even if we are already
in userspace (as seen by RCU) and allow calls to rcu_user_exit()
even if we are already in the kernel.

This makes the APIs more flexible to be called from architectures.
Exception entries for example won't need to know if they come from
userspace before calling rcu_user_exit().
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Create a new config option under the RCU menu that put
CPUs under RCU extended quiescent state (as in dynticks
idle mode) when they run in userspace. This require
some contribution from architectures to hook into kernel
and userspace boundaries.
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

In some cases, it is necessary to enter or exit userspace-RCU-idle mode
from an interrupt handler, for example, if some other CPU sends this
CPU a resched IPI.  In this case, the current CPU would enter the IPI
handler in userspace-RCU-idle mode, but would need to exit the IPI handler
after having exited that mode.

To allow this to work, this commit adds two new APIs to TREE_RCU:

- rcu_user_enter_after_irq(). This must be called from an interrupt between
rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit().  After the irq calls rcu_irq_exit(),
the irq handler will return into an RCU extended quiescent state.
In theory, this interrupt is never a nested interrupt, but in practice
it might interrupt softirq, which looks to RCU like a nested interrupt.

- rcu_user_exit_after_irq(). This must be called from a non-nesting
interrupt, interrupting an RCU extended quiescent state, also
between rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit(). After the irq calls
rcu_irq_exit(), the irq handler will return in an RCU non-quiescent
state.

[ Combined with "Allow calls to rcu_exit_user_irq from nesting irqs." ]
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

RCU currently insists that only idle tasks can enter RCU idle mode, which
prohibits an adaptive tickless kernel (AKA nohz cpusets), which in turn
would mean that usermode execution would always take scheduling-clock
interrupts, even when there is only one task runnable on the CPU in
question.

This commit therefore adds rcu_user_enter() and rcu_user_exit(), which
allow non-idle tasks to enter RCU idle mode.  These are quite similar
to rcu_idle_enter() and rcu_idle_exit(), respectively, except that they
omit the idle-task checks.

[ Updated to use "user" flag rather than separate check functions. ]

[ paulmck: Updated to drop exports of new functions based on Josh's patch
  getting rid of the need for them. ]
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
Cc: Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Posting a callback after the CPU_DEAD notifier effectively leaks
that callback unless/until that CPU comes back online.  Silence is
unhelpful when attempting to track down such leaks, so this commit emits
a WARN_ON_ONCE() and unconditionally leaks the callback when an offline
CPU attempts to register a callback.  The rdp->nxttail[RCU_NEXT_TAIL] is
set to NULL in the CPU_DEAD notifier and restored in the CPU_UP_PREPARE
notifier, allowing _call_rcu() to determine exactly when posting callbacks
is illegal.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Currently, _rcu_barrier() relies on preempt_disable() to prevent
any CPU from going offline, which in turn depends on CPU hotplug's
use of __stop_machine().

This patch therefore makes _rcu_barrier() use get_online_cpus() to
block CPU-hotplug operations.  This has the added benefit of removing
the need for _rcu_barrier() to adopt callbacks:  Because CPU-hotplug
operations are excluded, there can be no callbacks to adopt.  This
commit simplifies the code accordingly.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The first memory barrier in __call_rcu() is supposed to order any
updates done beforehand by the caller against the actual queuing
of the callback.  However, the second memory barrier (which is intended
to order incrementing the queue lengths before queuing the callback)
is also between the caller's updates and the queuing of the callback.
The second memory barrier can therefore serve both purposes.

This commit therefore removes the first memory barrier.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

If a given CPU avoids the idle loop but also avoids starting a new
RCU grace period for a full minute, RCU can issue spurious RCU CPU
stall warnings.  This commit fixes this issue by adding a check for
ongoing grace period to avoid these spurious stall warnings.
Reported-by: NBecky Bruce <bgillbruce@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The print_other_cpu_stall() function accesses a number of rcu_node
fields without protection from the ->lock.  In theory, this is not
a problem because the fields accessed are all integers, but in
practice the compiler can get nasty.  Therefore, the commit extends
the existing critical section to cover the entire loop body.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

The rcu_implicit_offline_qs() function implicitly assumed that execution
would progress predictably when interrupts are disabled, which is of course
not guaranteed when running on a hypervisor.  Furthermore, this function
is short, and is called from one place only in a short function.

This commit therefore ensures that the timing is checked before
checking the condition, which guarantees correct behavior even given
indefinite delays.  It also inlines rcu_implicit_offline_qs() into
rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs().
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Currently, rcu_init_geometry() only reshapes RCU's combining trees
if the leaf fanout is changed at boot time.  This means that by
default, kernels compiled with (say) NR_CPUS=4096 will keep oversized
data structures, even when running on systems with (say) four CPUs.

This commit therefore checks to see if the maximum number of CPUs on
the actual running system (nr_cpu_ids) differs from NR_CPUS, and if so
reshapes the combining trees accordingly.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

If CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT=y, if there are not enough CPUs (according
to nr_cpu_ids) to require more than a single rcu_node structure, but if
NR_CPUS is larger than would fit into a single rcu_node structure, then
the current rcu_init_levelspread() code is subject to integer overflow
in the eight-bit ->levelspread[] array in the rcu_state structure.

In this case, the solution is -not- to increase the size of the
elements in this array because the values in that array should be
constrained to the number of bits in an unsigned long.  Instead, this
commit replaces NR_CPUS with nr_cpu_ids in the rcu_init_levelspread()
function's initialization of the cprv local variable.  This results in
all of the arithmetic being consistently based off of the nr_cpu_ids
value, thus avoiding the overflow, which was caused by the mixing of
nr_cpu_ids and NR_CPUS.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

The current quiescent-state detection algorithm is needlessly
complex.  It records the grace-period number corresponding to
the quiescent state at the time of the quiescent state, which
works, but it seems better to simply erase any record of previous
quiescent states at the time that the CPU notices the new grace
period.  This has the further advantage of removing another piece
of RCU for which lockless reasoning is required.

Therefore, this commit makes this change.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Now that the rcu_node structures' ->completed fields are unconditionally
assigned at grace-period cleanup time, they should already have the
correct value for the new grace period at grace-period initialization
time.  This commit therefore inserts a WARN_ON_ONCE() to verify this
invariant.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Preemption greatly raised the probability of certain types of race
conditions, so this commit adds an anti-heisenbug to greatly increase
the collision cross section, also known as the probability of occurrence.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The current approach to grace-period initialization is vulnerable to
extremely low-probability races.  These races stem from the fact that
the old grace period is marked completed on the same traversal through
the rcu_node structure that is marking the start of the new grace period.
This means that some rcu_node structures will believe that the old grace
period is still in effect at the same time that other rcu_node structures
believe that the new grace period has already started.

These sorts of disagreements can result in too-short grace periods,
as shown in the following scenario:

1.	CPU 0 completes a grace period, but needs an additional
	grace period, so starts initializing one, initializing all
	the non-leaf rcu_node structures and the first leaf rcu_node
	structure.  Because CPU 0 is both completing the old grace
	period and starting a new one, it marks the completion of
	the old grace period and the start of the new grace period
	in a single traversal of the rcu_node structures.

	Therefore, CPUs corresponding to the first rcu_node structure
	can become aware that the prior grace period has completed, but
	CPUs corresponding to the other rcu_node structures will see
	this same prior grace period as still being in progress.

2.	CPU 1 passes through a quiescent state, and therefore informs
	the RCU core.  Because its leaf rcu_node structure has already
	been initialized, this CPU's quiescent state is applied to the
	new (and only partially initialized) grace period.

3.	CPU 1 enters an RCU read-side critical section and acquires
	a reference to data item A.  Note that this CPU believes that
	its critical section started after the beginning of the new
	grace period, and therefore will not block this new grace period.

4.	CPU 16 exits dyntick-idle mode.  Because it was in dyntick-idle
	mode, other CPUs informed the RCU core of its extended quiescent
	state for the past several grace periods.  This means that CPU 16
	is not yet aware that these past grace periods have ended.  Assume
	that CPU 16 corresponds to the second leaf rcu_node structure --
	which has not yet been made aware of the new grace period.

5.	CPU 16 removes data item A from its enclosing data structure
	and passes it to call_rcu(), which queues a callback in the
	RCU_NEXT_TAIL segment of the callback queue.

6.	CPU 16 enters the RCU core, possibly because it has taken a
	scheduling-clock interrupt, or alternatively because it has
	more than 10,000 callbacks queued.  It notes that the second
	most recent grace period has completed (recall that because it
	corresponds to the second as-yet-uninitialized rcu_node structure,
	it cannot yet become aware that the most recent grace period has
	completed), and therefore advances its callbacks.  The callback
	for data item A is therefore in the RCU_NEXT_READY_TAIL segment
	of the callback queue.

7.	CPU 0 completes initialization of the remaining leaf rcu_node
	structures for the new grace period, including the structure
	corresponding to CPU 16.

8.	CPU 16 again enters the RCU core, again, possibly because it has
	taken a scheduling-clock interrupt, or alternatively because
	it now has more than 10,000 callbacks queued.	It notes that
	the most recent grace period has ended, and therefore advances
	its callbacks.	The callback for data item A is therefore in
	the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment of the callback queue.

9.	All CPUs other than CPU 1 pass through quiescent states.  Because
	CPU 1 already passed through its quiescent state, the new grace
	period completes.  Note that CPU 1 is still in its RCU read-side
	critical section, still referencing data item A.

10.	Suppose that CPU 2 wais the last CPU to pass through a quiescent
	state for the new grace period, and suppose further that CPU 2
	did not have any callbacks queued, therefore not needing an
	additional grace period.  CPU 2 therefore traverses all of the
	rcu_node structures, marking the new grace period as completed,
	but does not initialize a new grace period.

11.	CPU 16 yet again enters the RCU core, yet again possibly because
	it has taken a scheduling-clock interrupt, or alternatively
	because it now has more than 10,000 callbacks queued.	It notes
	that the new grace period has ended, and therefore advances
	its callbacks.	The callback for data item A is therefore in
	the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment of the callback queue.  This means
	that this callback is now considered ready to be invoked.

12.	CPU 16 invokes the callback, freeing data item A while CPU 1
	is still referencing it.

This scenario represents a day-zero bug for TREE_RCU.  This commit
therefore ensures that the old grace period is marked completed in
all leaf rcu_node structures before a new grace period is marked
started in any of them.

That said, it would have been insanely difficult to force this race to
happen before the grace-period initialization process was preemptible.
Therefore, this commit is not a candidate for -stable.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Conflicts:

	kernel/rcutree.c

The module parameters blimit, qhimark, and qlomark (and more
recently, rcu_fanout_leaf) have permission masks of zero, so
that their values are not visible from sysfs.  This is unnecessary
and inconvenient to administrators who might like an easy way to
see what these values are on a running system.  This commit therefore
sets their permission masks to 0444, allowing them to be read but
not written.
Reported-by: NRusty Russell <rusty@ozlabs.org>
Reported-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Although almost everyone is well-served by the defaults, some uses of RCU
benefit from shorter grace periods, while others benefit more from the
greater efficiency provided by longer grace periods.  Situations requiring
a large number of grace periods to elapse (and wireshark startup has
been called out as an example of this) are helped by lower-latency
grace periods.  Furthermore, in some embedded applications, people are
willing to accept a small degradation in update efficiency (due to there
being more of the shorter grace-period operations) in order to gain the
lower latency.

In contrast, those few systems with thousands of CPUs need longer grace
periods because the CPU overhead of a grace period rises roughly
linearly with the number of CPUs.  Such systems normally do not make
much use of facilities that require large numbers of grace periods to
elapse, so this is a good tradeoff.

Therefore, this commit allows the durations to be controlled from sysfs.
There are two sysfs parameters, one named "jiffies_till_first_fqs" that
specifies the delay in jiffies from the end of grace-period initialization
until the first attempt to force quiescent states, and the other named
"jiffies_till_next_fqs" that specifies the delay (again in jiffies)
between subsequent attempts to force quiescent states.  They both default
to three jiffies, which is compatible with the old hard-coded behavior.

At some future time, it may be possible to automatically increase the
grace-period length with the number of CPUs, but we do not yet have
sufficient data to do a good job.  Preliminary data indicates that we
should add an addiitonal jiffy to each of the delays for every 200 CPUs
in the system, but more experimentation is needed.  For now, the number
of systems with more than 1,000 CPUs is small enough that this can be
relegated to boot-time hand tuning.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Large systems running RCU_FAST_NO_HZ kernels see extreme memory
contention on the rcu_state structure's ->fqslock field.  This
can be avoided by disabling RCU_FAST_NO_HZ, either at compile time
or at boot time (via the nohz kernel boot parameter), but large
systems will no doubt become sensitive to energy consumption.
This commit therefore uses a combining-tree approach to spread the
memory contention across new cache lines in the leaf rcu_node structures.
This can be thought of as a tournament lock that has only a try-lock
acquisition primitive.

The effect on small systems is minimal, because such systems have
an rcu_node "tree" consisting of a single node.  In addition, this
functionality is not used on fastpaths.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

RCU quiescent-state forcing is currently carried out without preemption
points, which can result in excessive latency spikes on large systems
(many hundreds or thousands of CPUs).  This patch therefore inserts
a voluntary preemption point into force_qs_rnp(), which should greatly
reduce the magnitude of these spikes.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

As the first step towards allowing quiescent-state forcing to be
preemptible, this commit moves RCU quiescent-state forcing into the
same kthread that is now used to initialize and clean up after grace
periods.  This is yet another step towards keeping scheduling
latency down to a dull roar.

Updated to change from raw_spin_lock_irqsave() to raw_spin_lock_irq()
and to remove the now-unused rcu_state structure fields as suggested by
Peter Zijlstra.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Earlier versions of RCU invoked the RCU core from the CPU_DYING notifier
in order to note a quiescent state for the outgoing CPU.  Because the
CPU is marked "offline" during the execution of the CPU_DYING notifiers,
the RCU core had to tolerate being invoked from an offline CPU.  However,
commit b1420f1c (Make rcu_barrier() less disruptive) left only tracing
code in the CPU_DYING notifier, so the RCU core need no longer execute
on offline CPUs.  This commit therefore enforces this restriction.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Then rcu_gp_kthread() function is too large and furthermore needs to
have the force_quiescent_state() code pulled in.  This commit therefore
breaks up rcu_gp_kthread() into rcu_gp_init() and rcu_gp_cleanup().
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

RCU grace-period cleanup is currently carried out with interrupts
disabled, which can result in excessive latency spikes on large systems
(many hundreds or thousands of CPUs).  This patch therefore makes the
RCU grace-period cleanup be preemptible, including voluntary preemption
points, which should eliminate those latency spikes.  Similar spikes from
forcing of quiescent states will be dealt with similarly by later patches.

Updated to replace uses of spin_lock_irqsave() with spin_lock_irq(), as
suggested by Peter Zijlstra.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

As a first step towards allowing grace-period cleanup to be preemptible,
this commit moves the RCU grace-period cleanup into the same kthread
that is now used to initialize grace periods.  This is needed to keep
scheduling latency down to a dull roar.

[ paulmck: Get rid of stray spin_lock_irqsave() calls. ]
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

RCU grace-period initialization is currently carried out with interrupts
disabled, which can result in 200-microsecond latency spikes on systems
on which RCU has been configured for 4096 CPUs.  This patch therefore
makes the RCU grace-period initialization be preemptible, which should
eliminate those latency spikes.  Similar spikes from grace-period cleanup
and the forcing of quiescent states will be dealt with similarly by later
patches.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The next step in reducing RCU's grace-period initialization latency on
large systems will make this initialization preemptible.  Unfortunately,
making the grace-period initialization subject to interrupts (let alone
preemption) exposes the following race on systems whose rcu_node tree
contains more than one node:

1.	CPU 31 starts initializing the grace period, including the
    	first leaf rcu_node structures, and is then preempted.

2.	CPU 0 refers to the first leaf rcu_node structure, and notes
    	that a new grace period has started.  It passes through a
    	quiescent state shortly thereafter, and informs the RCU core
    	of this rite of passage.

3.	CPU 0 enters an RCU read-side critical section, acquiring
    	a pointer to an RCU-protected data item.

4.	CPU 31 takes an interrupt whose handler removes the data item
	referenced by CPU 0 from the data structure, and registers an
	RCU callback in order to free it.

5.	CPU 31 resumes initializing the grace period, including its
    	own rcu_node structure.  In invokes rcu_start_gp_per_cpu(),
    	which advances all callbacks, including the one registered
    	in #4 above, to be handled by the current grace period.

6.	The remaining CPUs pass through quiescent states and inform
    	the RCU core, but CPU 0 remains in its RCU read-side critical
    	section, still referencing the now-removed data item.

7.	The grace period completes and all the callbacks are invoked,
    	including the one that frees the data item that CPU 0 is still
    	referencing.  Oops!!!

One way to avoid this race is to remove grace-period acceleration from
rcu_start_gp_per_cpu().  Now, the only reason for this acceleration was
to allow CPUs bringing RCU out of idle state to have their callbacks
invoked after only one grace period, rather than the two grace periods
that would otherwise be required.  But this acceleration does not
work when RCU grace-period initialization is moved to a kthread because
the CPU posting the callback is no longer necessarily the CPU that is
initializing the resulting grace period.

This commit therefore removes this now-pointless (and soon to be dangerous)
grace-period acceleration, thus avoiding the above race.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

As the first step towards allowing grace-period initialization to be
preemptible, this commit moves the RCU grace-period initialization
into its own kthread.  This is needed to keep large-system scheduling
latency at reasonable levels.

Also change raw_spin_lock_irqsave() to raw_spin_lock_irq() as suggested
by Peter Zijlstra in review comments.
Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
Reported-by: NDimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Each grace period is supposed to have at least one callback waiting
for that grace period to complete.  However, if CONFIG_NO_HZ=n, an
extra callback-free grace period is no big problem -- it will chew up
a tiny bit of CPU time, but it will complete normally.  In contrast,
CONFIG_NO_HZ=y kernels have the potential for all the CPUs to go to
sleep indefinitely, in turn indefinitely delaying completion of the
callback-free grace period.  Given that nothing is waiting on this grace
period, this is also not a problem.

That is, unless RCU CPU stall warnings are also enabled, as they are
in recent kernels.  In this case, if a CPU wakes up after at least one
minute of inactivity, an RCU CPU stall warning will result.  The reason
that no one noticed until quite recently is that most systems have enough
OS noise that they will never remain absolutely idle for a full minute.
But there are some embedded systems with cut-down userspace configurations
that consistently get into this situation.

All this begs the question of exactly how a callback-free grace period
gets started in the first place.  This can happen due to the fact that
CPUs do not necessarily agree on which grace period is in progress.
If a CPU still believes that the grace period that just completed is
still ongoing, it will believe that it has callbacks that need to wait for
another grace period, never mind the fact that the grace period that they
were waiting for just completed.  This CPU can therefore erroneously
decide to start a new grace period.  Note that this can happen in
TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU even on a single-CPU system:  Deadlock
considerations mean that the CPU that detected the end of the grace
period is not necessarily officially informed of this fact for some time.

Once this CPU notices that the earlier grace period completed, it will
invoke its callbacks.  It then won't have any callbacks left.  If no
other CPU has any callbacks, we now have a callback-free grace period.

This commit therefore makes CPUs check more carefully before starting a
new grace period.  This new check relies on an array of tail pointers
into each CPU's list of callbacks.  If the CPU is up to date on which
grace periods have completed, it checks to see if any callbacks follow
the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment, otherwise it checks to see if any callbacks
follow the RCU_WAIT_TAIL segment.  The reason that this works is that
the RCU_WAIT_TAIL segment will be promoted to the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment
as soon as the CPU is officially notified that the old grace period
has ended.

This change is to cpu_needs_another_gp(), which is called in a number
of places.  The only one that really matters is in rcu_start_gp(), where
the root rcu_node structure's ->lock is held, which prevents any
other CPU from starting or completing a grace period, so that the
comparison that determines whether the CPU is missing the completion
of a grace period is stable.
Reported-by: NBecky Bruce <bgillbruce@gmail.com>
Reported-by: NSubodh Nijsure <snijsure@grid-net.com>
Reported-by: NPaul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>  # OMAP3730, OMAP4430
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

Bring RCU into the new-age CPU-hotplug fold by modifying RCU's per-CPU
kthread code to use the new smp_hotplug_thread facility.

[ tglx: Adapted it to use callbacks and to the simplified rcu yield ]
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120716103948.673354828@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The rcu_yield() code is amazing. It's there to avoid starvation of the
system when lots of (boosting) work is to be done.

Now looking at the code it's functionality is:

 Make the thread SCHED_OTHER and very nice, i.e. get it out of the way
 Arm a timer with 2 ticks
 schedule()

Now if the system goes idle the rcu task returns, regains SCHED_FIFO
and plugs on. If the systems stays busy the timer fires and wakes a
per node kthread which in turn makes the per cpu thread SCHED_FIFO and
brings it back on the cpu. For the boosting thread the "make it FIFO"
bit is missing and it just runs some magic boost checks. Now this is a
lot of code with extra threads and complexity.

It's way simpler to let the tasks when they detect overload schedule
away for 2 ticks and defer the normal wakeup as long as they are in
yielded state and the cpu is not idle.

That solves the same problem and the only difference is that when the
cpu goes idle it's not guaranteed that the thread returns right away,
but it won't be longer out than two ticks, so no harm is done. If
that's an issue than it is way simpler just to wake the task from
idle as RCU has callbacks there anyway.
Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120716103948.131256723@linutronix.deSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The Linux kernel coding style says that single-statement blocks should
omit curly braces unless the other leg of the "if" statement has
multiple statements, in which case the curly braces should be included.
This commit fixes RCU's violations of this rule.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The recent bug that introduced the RCU callback list/count mismatch
showed the need for a diagnostic to check for this, which this commit
adds.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

Problems in RCU idle entry and exit are almost always confined to the
offending CPU.  This commit therefore switches ftrace_dump() from
DUMP_ALL to DUMP_ORIG.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: NHeiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Tested-by: NPascal Chapperon <pascal.chapperon@wanadoo.fr>

If a CPU goes offline with callbacks queued, those callbacks might be
indefinitely postponed, which can result in a system hang.  This commit
therefore inserts warnings for this condition.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

It is time to optimize CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU's synchronize_rcu()
for uniprocessor optimization, which means that rcu_blocking_is_gp()
can no longer rely on RCU read-side critical sections having disabled
preemption.  This commit therefore disables preemption across
rcu_blocking_is_gp()'s scan of the cpu_online_mask.

(Updated from previous version to fix embarrassing bug spotted by
Wu Fengguang.)
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

The __call_rcu() function is a bit overweight, so this commit splits
it into actual enqueuing of and accounting for the callback (__call_rcu())
and associated RCU-core processing (__call_rcu_core()).
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

The __call_rcu() function will invoke the RCU core, for example, if
it detects that the current CPU has too many callbacks.  However, this
can happen on an offline CPU that is on its way to the idle loop, in
which case it is an error to invoke the RCU core, and the excess callbacks
will be adopted in any case.  This commit therefore adds checks to
__call_rcu() for running on an offline CPU, refraining from invoking
the RCU core in this case.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>