- 23 9月, 2012 15 次提交
-
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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
-
- 06 7月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
- 03 7月, 2012 23 次提交
-
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
Although __call_rcu() is handled correctly when called from a momentary non-idle period, if it is called on a CPU that RCU believes to be idle on RCU_FAST_NO_HZ kernels, the callback might be indefinitely postponed. This commit therefore ensures that RCU is aware of the new callback and has a chance to force the CPU out of dyntick-idle mode when a new callback is posted. Reported-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
The _rcu_barrier() function accesses other CPUs' rcu_data structure's ->qlen field without benefit of locking. This commit therefore adds the required ACCESS_ONCE() wrappers around accesses and updates that need it. ACCESS_ONCE() is not needed when a CPU accesses its own ->qlen, or in code that cannot run while _rcu_barrier() is sampling ->qlen fields. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
There are a couple of open-coded initializations of the rcu_data structure's RCU callback list. This commit therefore consolidates them into a new init_callback_list() function. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
The code that attempts to identify stalls that end just as we detect them is broken by both flavors of initialization failure. This commit therefore properly initializes and computes the count of the number of reasons why the RCU grace period is stalled. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
Before RCU had unified idle, the RCU_SAVE_DYNTICK leg of the switch statement in force_quiescent_state() was dead code for CONFIG_NO_HZ=n kernel builds. With unified idle, the code is never dead. This commit therefore removes the "if" statement designed to make gcc aware of when the code was and was not dead. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
The arrival of TREE_PREEMPT_RCU some years back included some ugly code involving either #ifdef or #ifdef'ed wrapper functions to iterate over all non-SRCU flavors of RCU. This commit therefore introduces a for_each_rcu_flavor() iterator over the rcu_state structures for each flavor of RCU to clean up a bit of the ugliness. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
With the advent of __this_cpu_ptr(), it is no longer necessary to pass both the rcu_state and rcu_data structures into __rcu_process_callbacks(). This commit therefore computes the rcu_data pointer from the rcu_state pointer within __rcu_process_callbacks() so that callers can pass in only the pointer to the rcu_state structure. This paves the way for linking the rcu_state structures together and iterating over them. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: NJosh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
This commit adds event tracing for _rcu_barrier() execution. This is defined only if RCU_TRACE=y. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
The traditional rcu_barrier() implementation has serialized all requests, regardless of RCU flavor, and also does not coalesce concurrent requests. In the past, this has been good and sufficient. However, systems are getting larger and use of rcu_barrier() has been increasing. This commit therefore introduces a counter-based scheme that allows _rcu_barrier() calls for the same flavor of RCU to take advantage of each others' work. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
For global variables, C defaults all fields to zero. The initialization of the rcu_state structure's ->n_force_qs and ->n_force_qs_ngp fields is therefore redundant, so this commit removes these initializations. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
In order to allow each RCU flavor to concurrently execute its rcu_barrier() function, it is necessary to move the relevant state to the rcu_state structure. This commit therefore moves the rcu_barrier_mutex global variable to a new ->barrier_mutex field in the rcu_state structure. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
In order to allow each RCU flavor to concurrently execute its rcu_barrier() function, it is necessary to move the relevant state to the rcu_state structure. This commit therefore moves the rcu_barrier_completion global variable to a new ->barrier_completion field in the rcu_state structure. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
In order to allow each RCU flavor to concurrently execute its rcu_barrier() function, it is necessary to move the relevant state to the rcu_state structure. This commit therefore moves the rcu_barrier_cpu_count global variable to a new ->barrier_cpu_count field in the rcu_state structure. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
In order for multiple flavors of RCU to each concurrently run one rcu_barrier(), each flavor needs its own per-CPU set of rcu_head structures. This commit therefore moves _rcu_barrier()'s set of per-CPU rcu_head structures from per-CPU variables to the existing per-CPU and per-RCU-flavor rcu_data structures. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
This is a preparatory commit for increasing rcu_barrier()'s concurrency. It adds a pointer in the rcu_data structure to the corresponding call_rcu() function. This allows a pointer to the rcu_data structure to imply the function pointer, which allows _rcu_barrier() state to be placed in the rcu_state structure. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
Upcoming rcu_barrier() concurrency commits will result in line lengths greater than 80 characters in the RCU_STATE_INITIALIZER(), so this commit shortens the name of the macro's argument to prevent this. 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>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
The rcu_node tree array is sized based on compile-time constants, including NR_CPUS. Although this approach has worked well in the past, the recent trend by many distros to define NR_CPUS=4096 results in excessive grace-period-initialization latencies. This commit therefore substitutes the run-time computed nr_cpu_ids for the compile-time NR_CPUS when building the tree. This can result in much of the compile-time-allocated rcu_node array being unused. If this is a major problem, you are in a specialized situation anyway, so you can manually adjust the NR_CPUS, RCU_FANOUT, and RCU_FANOUT_LEAF kernel config parameters. Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-
由 Paul E. McKenney 提交于
Although making RCU_FANOUT_LEAF a kernel configuration parameter rather than a fixed constant makes it easier for people to decrease cache-miss overhead for large systems, it is of little help for people who must run a single pre-built kernel binary. This commit therefore allows the value of RCU_FANOUT_LEAF to be increased (but not decreased!) via a boot-time parameter named rcutree.rcu_fanout_leaf. Reported-by: NMike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: NPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-