Skip to content

cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel

openanolis / cloud-kernel
大约 1 年 前同步成功

通知 158
Star 36
Fork 7
cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 11 6月, 2013 2 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Drive quiescent-state-forcing delay from HZ · 026ad283
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Systems with HZ=100 can have slow bootup times due to the default
three-jiffy delays between quiescent-state forcing attempts.  This
commit therefore auto-tunes the RCU_JIFFIES_TILL_FORCE_QS value based
on the value of HZ.  However, this would break very large systems that
require more time between quiescent-state forcing attempts.  This
commit therefore also ups the default delay by one jiffy for each
256 CPUs that might be on the system (based off of nr_cpu_ids at
runtime, -not- NR_CPUS at build time).

Updated to collapse #ifdefs for RCU_JIFFIES_TILL_FORCE_QS into a
step-function definition as suggested by Josh Triplett.
Reported-by: NPaul Mackerras <paulus@au1.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      026ad283
    • S
      rcu: Don't call wakeup() with rcu_node structure ->lock held · 016a8d5b
      由 Steven Rostedt 提交于 
      This commit fixes a lockdep-detected deadlock by moving a wake_up()
call out from a rnp->lock critical section.  Please see below for
the long version of this story.

On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 16:13 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:

> [12572.705832] ======================================================
> [12572.750317] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [12572.796978] 3.10.0-rc3+ #39 Not tainted
> [12572.833381] -------------------------------------------------------
> [12572.862233] trinity-child17/31341 is trying to acquire lock:
> [12572.870390]  (rcu_node_0){..-.-.}, at: [<ffffffff811054ff>] rcu_read_unlock_special+0x9f/0x4c0
> [12572.878859]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [12572.894894]  (&ctx->lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff811390ed>] perf_lock_task_context+0x7d/0x2d0
> [12572.903381]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [12572.927541]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [12572.943736]
> -> #4 (&ctx->lock){-.-...}:
> [12572.960032]        [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12572.968337]        [<ffffffff816ebc90>] _raw_spin_lock+0x40/0x80
> [12572.976633]        [<ffffffff8113c987>] __perf_event_task_sched_out+0x2e7/0x5e0
> [12572.984969]        [<ffffffff81088953>] perf_event_task_sched_out+0x93/0xa0
> [12572.993326]        [<ffffffff816ea0bf>] __schedule+0x2cf/0x9c0
> [12573.001652]        [<ffffffff816eacfe>] schedule_user+0x2e/0x70
> [12573.009998]        [<ffffffff816ecd64>] retint_careful+0x12/0x2e
> [12573.018321]
> -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}:
> [12573.034628]        [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12573.042930]        [<ffffffff816ebc90>] _raw_spin_lock+0x40/0x80
> [12573.051248]        [<ffffffff8108e6a7>] wake_up_new_task+0xb7/0x260
> [12573.059579]        [<ffffffff810492f5>] do_fork+0x105/0x470
> [12573.067880]        [<ffffffff81049686>] kernel_thread+0x26/0x30
> [12573.076202]        [<ffffffff816cee63>] rest_init+0x23/0x140
> [12573.084508]        [<ffffffff81ed8e1f>] start_kernel+0x3f1/0x3fe
> [12573.092852]        [<ffffffff81ed856f>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
> [12573.101233]        [<ffffffff81ed863d>] x86_64_start_kernel+0xcc/0xcf
> [12573.109528]
> -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.-.}:
> [12573.125675]        [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12573.133829]        [<ffffffff816ebe9b>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4b/0x90
> [12573.141964]        [<ffffffff8108e881>] try_to_wake_up+0x31/0x320
> [12573.150065]        [<ffffffff8108ebe2>] default_wake_function+0x12/0x20
> [12573.158151]        [<ffffffff8107bbf8>] autoremove_wake_function+0x18/0x40
> [12573.166195]        [<ffffffff81085398>] __wake_up_common+0x58/0x90
> [12573.174215]        [<ffffffff81086909>] __wake_up+0x39/0x50
> [12573.182146]        [<ffffffff810fc3da>] rcu_start_gp_advanced.isra.11+0x4a/0x50
> [12573.190119]        [<ffffffff810fdb09>] rcu_start_future_gp+0x1c9/0x1f0
> [12573.198023]        [<ffffffff810fe2c4>] rcu_nocb_kthread+0x114/0x930
> [12573.205860]        [<ffffffff8107a91d>] kthread+0xed/0x100
> [12573.213656]        [<ffffffff816f4b1c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> [12573.221379]
> -> #1 (&rsp->gp_wq){..-.-.}:
> [12573.236329]        [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12573.243783]        [<ffffffff816ebe9b>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4b/0x90
> [12573.251178]        [<ffffffff810868f3>] __wake_up+0x23/0x50
> [12573.258505]        [<ffffffff810fc3da>] rcu_start_gp_advanced.isra.11+0x4a/0x50
> [12573.265891]        [<ffffffff810fdb09>] rcu_start_future_gp+0x1c9/0x1f0
> [12573.273248]        [<ffffffff810fe2c4>] rcu_nocb_kthread+0x114/0x930
> [12573.280564]        [<ffffffff8107a91d>] kthread+0xed/0x100
> [12573.287807]        [<ffffffff816f4b1c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0

Notice the above call chain.

rcu_start_future_gp() is called with the rnp->lock held. Then it calls
rcu_start_gp_advance, which does a wakeup.

You can't do wakeups while holding the rnp->lock, as that would mean
that you could not do a rcu_read_unlock() while holding the rq lock, or
any lock that was taken while holding the rq lock. This is because...
(See below).

> [12573.295067]
> -> #0 (rcu_node_0){..-.-.}:
> [12573.309293]        [<ffffffff810b8d36>] __lock_acquire+0x1786/0x1af0
> [12573.316568]        [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12573.323825]        [<ffffffff816ebc90>] _raw_spin_lock+0x40/0x80
> [12573.331081]        [<ffffffff811054ff>] rcu_read_unlock_special+0x9f/0x4c0
> [12573.338377]        [<ffffffff810760a6>] __rcu_read_unlock+0x96/0xa0
> [12573.345648]        [<ffffffff811391b3>] perf_lock_task_context+0x143/0x2d0
> [12573.352942]        [<ffffffff8113938e>] find_get_context+0x4e/0x1f0
> [12573.360211]        [<ffffffff811403f4>] SYSC_perf_event_open+0x514/0xbd0
> [12573.367514]        [<ffffffff81140e49>] SyS_perf_event_open+0x9/0x10
> [12573.374816]        [<ffffffff816f4dd4>] tracesys+0xdd/0xe2

Notice the above trace.

perf took its own ctx->lock, which can be taken while holding the rq
lock. While holding this lock, it did a rcu_read_unlock(). The
perf_lock_task_context() basically looks like:

rcu_read_lock();
raw_spin_lock(ctx->lock);
rcu_read_unlock();

Now, what looks to have happened, is that we scheduled after taking that
first rcu_read_lock() but before taking the spin lock. When we scheduled
back in and took the ctx->lock, the following rcu_read_unlock()
triggered the "special" code.

The rcu_read_unlock_special() takes the rnp->lock, which gives us a
possible deadlock scenario.

	CPU0		CPU1		CPU2
	----		----		----

				     rcu_nocb_kthread()
    lock(rq->lock);
		    lock(ctx->lock);
				     lock(rnp->lock);

				     wake_up();

				     lock(rq->lock);

		    rcu_read_unlock();

		    rcu_read_unlock_special();

		    lock(rnp->lock);
    lock(ctx->lock);

**** DEADLOCK ****

> [12573.382068]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [12573.403229] Chain exists of:
>   rcu_node_0 --> &rq->lock --> &ctx->lock
>
> [12573.424471]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [12573.438499]        CPU0                    CPU1
> [12573.445599]        ----                    ----
> [12573.452691]   lock(&ctx->lock);
> [12573.459799]                                lock(&rq->lock);
> [12573.467010]                                lock(&ctx->lock);
> [12573.474192]   lock(rcu_node_0);
> [12573.481262]
>  *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [12573.501931] 1 lock held by trinity-child17/31341:
> [12573.508990]  #0:  (&ctx->lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff811390ed>] perf_lock_task_context+0x7d/0x2d0
> [12573.516475]
> stack backtrace:
> [12573.530395] CPU: 1 PID: 31341 Comm: trinity-child17 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc3+ #39
> [12573.545357]  ffffffff825b4f90 ffff880219f1dbc0 ffffffff816e375b ffff880219f1dc00
> [12573.552868]  ffffffff816dfa5d ffff880219f1dc50 ffff88023ce4d1f8 ffff88023ce4ca40
> [12573.560353]  0000000000000001 0000000000000001 ffff88023ce4d1f8 ffff880219f1dcc0
> [12573.567856] Call Trace:
> [12573.575011]  [<ffffffff816e375b>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
> [12573.582284]  [<ffffffff816dfa5d>] print_circular_bug+0x200/0x20f
> [12573.589637]  [<ffffffff810b8d36>] __lock_acquire+0x1786/0x1af0
> [12573.596982]  [<ffffffff810918f5>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0xb5/0x100
> [12573.604344]  [<ffffffff810b9851>] lock_acquire+0x91/0x1f0
> [12573.611652]  [<ffffffff811054ff>] ? rcu_read_unlock_special+0x9f/0x4c0
> [12573.619030]  [<ffffffff816ebc90>] _raw_spin_lock+0x40/0x80
> [12573.626331]  [<ffffffff811054ff>] ? rcu_read_unlock_special+0x9f/0x4c0
> [12573.633671]  [<ffffffff811054ff>] rcu_read_unlock_special+0x9f/0x4c0
> [12573.640992]  [<ffffffff811390ed>] ? perf_lock_task_context+0x7d/0x2d0
> [12573.648330]  [<ffffffff810b429e>] ? put_lock_stats.isra.29+0xe/0x40
> [12573.655662]  [<ffffffff813095a0>] ? delay_tsc+0x90/0xe0
> [12573.662964]  [<ffffffff810760a6>] __rcu_read_unlock+0x96/0xa0
> [12573.670276]  [<ffffffff811391b3>] perf_lock_task_context+0x143/0x2d0
> [12573.677622]  [<ffffffff81139070>] ? __perf_event_enable+0x370/0x370
> [12573.684981]  [<ffffffff8113938e>] find_get_context+0x4e/0x1f0
> [12573.692358]  [<ffffffff811403f4>] SYSC_perf_event_open+0x514/0xbd0
> [12573.699753]  [<ffffffff8108cd9d>] ? get_parent_ip+0xd/0x50
> [12573.707135]  [<ffffffff810b71fd>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xfd/0x1c0
> [12573.714599]  [<ffffffff81140e49>] SyS_perf_event_open+0x9/0x10
> [12573.721996]  [<ffffffff816f4dd4>] tracesys+0xdd/0xe2

This commit delays the wakeup via irq_work(), which is what
perf and ftrace use to perform wakeups in critical sections.
Reported-by: NDave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      016a8d5b
  3. 19 4月, 2013 1 次提交
    • F
      nohz: Ensure full dynticks CPUs are RCU nocbs · d1e43fa5
      由 Frederic Weisbecker 提交于 
      We need full dynticks CPU to also be RCU nocb so
that we don't have to keep the tick to handle RCU
callbacks.

Make sure the range passed to nohz_full= boot
parameter is a subset of rcu_nocbs=

The CPUs that fail to meet this requirement will be
excluded from the nohz_full range. This is checked
early in boot time, before any CPU has the opportunity
to stop its tick.
Suggested-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reviewed-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
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: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      d1e43fa5
  5. 16 4月, 2013 1 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Kick adaptive-ticks CPUs that are holding up RCU grace periods · 65d798f0
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Adaptive-ticks CPUs inform RCU when they enter kernel mode, but they do
not necessarily turn the scheduler-clock tick back on.  This state of
affairs could result in RCU waiting on an adaptive-ticks CPU running
for an extended period in kernel mode.  Such a CPU will never run the
RCU state machine, and could therefore indefinitely extend the RCU state
machine, sooner or later resulting in an OOM condition.

This patch, inspired by an earlier patch by Frederic Weisbecker, therefore
causes RCU's force-quiescent-state processing to check for this condition
and to send an IPI to CPUs that remain in that state for too long.
"Too long" currently means about three jiffies by default, which is
quite some time for a CPU to remain in the kernel without blocking.
The rcu_tree.jiffies_till_first_fqs and rcutree.jiffies_till_next_fqs
sysfs variables may be used to tune "too long" if needed.
Reported-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.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: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
      65d798f0
  7. 26 3月, 2013 5 次提交
  9. 14 3月, 2013 1 次提交
  11. 13 3月, 2013 2 次提交
  13. 29 1月, 2013 1 次提交
  15. 27 1月, 2013 1 次提交
  17. 09 1月, 2013 1 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Tag callback lists with corresponding grace-period number · dc35c893
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Currently, callbacks are advanced each time the corresponding CPU
notices a change in its leaf rcu_node structure's ->completed value
(this value counts grace-period completions).  This approach has worked
quite well, but with the advent of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ, we cannot count on
a given CPU seeing all the grace-period completions.  When a CPU misses
a grace-period completion that occurs while it is in dyntick-idle mode,
this will delay invocation of its callbacks.

In addition, acceleration of callbacks (when RCU realizes that a given
callback need only wait until the end of the next grace period, rather
than having to wait for a partial grace period followed by a full
grace period) must be carried out extremely carefully.  Insufficient
acceleration will result in unnecessarily long grace-period latencies,
while excessive acceleration will result in premature callback invocation.
Changes that involve this tradeoff are therefore among the most
nerve-wracking changes to RCU.

This commit therefore explicitly tags groups of callbacks with the
number of the grace period that they are waiting for.  This means that
callback-advancement and callback-acceleration functions are idempotent,
so that excessive acceleration will merely waste a few CPU cycles.  This
also allows a CPU to take full advantage of any grace periods that have
elapsed while it has been in dyntick-idle mode.  It should also enable
simulataneous simplifications to and optimizations of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      dc35c893
  19. 17 11月, 2012 2 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Separate accounting of callbacks from callback-free CPUs · c635a4e1
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Currently, callback invocations from callback-free CPUs are accounted to
the CPU that registered the callback, but using the same field that is
used for normal callbacks.  This makes it impossible to determine from
debugfs output whether callbacks are in fact being diverted.  This commit
therefore adds a separate ->n_nocbs_invoked field in the rcu_data structure
in which diverted callback invocations are counted.  RCU's debugfs tracing
still displays normal callback invocations using ci=, but displayed
diverted callbacks with nci=.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      c635a4e1
    • P
      rcu: Add callback-free CPUs · 3fbfbf7a
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      RCU callback execution can add significant OS jitter and also can
degrade both scheduling latency and, in asymmetric multiprocessors,
energy efficiency.  This commit therefore adds the ability for selected
CPUs ("rcu_nocbs=" boot parameter) to have their callbacks offloaded
to kthreads.  If the "rcu_nocb_poll" boot parameter is also specified,
these kthreads will do polling, removing the need for the offloaded
CPUs to do wakeups.  At least one CPU must be doing normal callback
processing: currently CPU 0 cannot be selected as a no-CBs CPU.
In addition, attempts to offline the last normal-CBs CPU will fail.

This feature was inspired by Jim Houston's and Joe Korty's JRCU, and
this commit includes fixes to problems located by Fengguang Wu's
kbuild test robot.

[ paulmck: Added gfp.h include file as suggested by Fengguang Wu. ]
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      3fbfbf7a
  21. 09 11月, 2012 3 次提交
  23. 09 10月, 2012 1 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Grace-period initialization excludes only RCU notifier · a4fbe35a
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      Kirill noted the following deadlock cycle on shutdown involving padata:

> With commit 755609a9 I've got deadlock on
> poweroff.
>
> It guess it happens because of race for cpu_hotplug.lock:
>
>       CPU A                                   CPU B
> disable_nonboot_cpus()
> _cpu_down()
> cpu_hotplug_begin()
>  mutex_lock(&cpu_hotplug.lock);
> __cpu_notify()
> padata_cpu_callback()
> __padata_remove_cpu()
> padata_replace()
> synchronize_rcu()
>                                       rcu_gp_kthread()
>                                       get_online_cpus();
>                                       mutex_lock(&cpu_hotplug.lock);

It would of course be good to eliminate grace-period delays from
CPU-hotplug notifiers, but that is a separate issue.  Deadlock is
not an appropriate diagnostic for excessive CPU-hotplug latency.

Fortunately, grace-period initialization does not actually need to
exclude all of the CPU-hotplug operation, but rather only RCU's own
CPU_UP_PREPARE and CPU_DEAD CPU-hotplug notifiers.  This commit therefore
introduces a new per-rcu_state onoff_mutex that provides the required
concurrency control in place of the get_online_cpus() that was previously
in rcu_gp_init().
Reported-by: N"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: NKirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
      a4fbe35a
  25. 26 9月, 2012 2 次提交
    • F
      rcu: Ignore userspace extended quiescent state by default · 1e1a689f
      由 Frederic Weisbecker 提交于 
      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>
      1e1a689f
    • F
      rcu: Allow rcu_user_enter()/exit() to nest · c5d900bf
      由 Frederic Weisbecker 提交于 
      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>
      c5d900bf
  27. 23 9月, 2012 8 次提交
  29. 13 8月, 2012 2 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Use smp_hotplug_thread facility for RCUs per-CPU kthread · 62ab7072
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      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>
      62ab7072
    • T
      rcu: Yield simpler · 5d01bbd1
      由 Thomas Gleixner 提交于 
      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>
      5d01bbd1
  31. 03 7月, 2012 7 次提交