Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
大约 1 年 前同步成功

通知 5
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel

体验新版 GitCode，发现更多精彩内容 >>

切换分支/标签
  1. 12 12月, 2011 3 次提交
    • P
      rcu: Make synchronize_sched_expedited() better at work sharing · 7077714e
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      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: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
      7077714e
    • P
      rcu: Avoid RCU-preempt expedited grace-period botch · 389abd48
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      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: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
      389abd48
    • P
      rcu: ->signaled better named ->fqs_state · af446b70
      由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于 
      The ->signaled field was named before complications in the form of
dyntick-idle mode and offlined CPUs.  These complications have required
that force_quiescent_state() be implemented as a state machine, instead
of simply unconditionally sending reschedule IPIs.  Therefore, this
commit renames ->signaled to ->fqs_state to catch up with the new
force_quiescent_state() reality.
Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
      af446b70
  3. 10 12月, 2011 9 次提交
  5. 09 12月, 2011 28 次提交