Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1522428
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state |
| Date | 2016-11-15 09:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDH8d-2s4-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sDsLU-16h-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDsLV-16h-51@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDteW-1wp-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDtoC-1A0-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDu1k-25s-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:12:37AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 06:37:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:25:12AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 08:57:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Expedited grace periods check dyntick-idle state, and avoid sending > > > > IPIs to idle CPUs, including those running guest OSes, and, on NOHZ_FULL > > > > kernels, nohz_full CPUs. However, the kernel has been observed checking > > > > a CPU while it was non-idle, but sending the IPI after it has gone > > > > idle. This commit therefore rechecks idle state immediately before > > > > sending the IPI, refraining from IPIing CPUs that have since gone idle. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > > atomic_add_return(0, ...) seems odd. Do you actually want that, rather > > > than atomic_read(...)? If so, can you please document exactly why? > > > > Yes that is weird. The only effective difference is that it would do a > > load-exclusive instead of a regular load. > > It is weird, and checking to see if it is safe to convert it and its > friends to something with less overhead is on my list. This starts > with a patch series I will post soon that consolidates all these > atomic_add_return() calls into a single function, which will ease testing > and other verification. > > All that aside, please keep in mind that much is required from this load. > It is part of a network of ordered operations that guarantee that any > operation from any CPU preceding a given grace period is seen to precede > any other operation from any CPU following that same grace period. > And each and every CPU must agree on the order of those two operations, > otherwise, RCU is broken. OK, so something similar to: smp_mb(); atomic_read(); then? That would order, with global transitivity, against prior operations. > In addition, please note also that these operations are nowhere near > any fastpaths. My concern is mostly that it reads very weird. I appreciate this not being fast path code, but confusing code is bad in any form.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/7] Miscellaneous fixes for 4.10 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/7] rcu: Remove obsolete comment from __call_rcu() "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/7] rcu: Remove obsolete rcu_check_callbacks() header comment "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/7] rcu: RCU_TRACE enables event tracing as well as debugfs "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Don't kick unless grace period or request "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/7] rcu: Tighten up __call_rcu() rcu_head alignment check "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-11-14 18:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-14 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 19:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-15 09:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/7] rcu: Make expedited grace periods recheck dyntick idle state "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-15 15:40 +0100
[PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/7] torture: Trace long read-side delays "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/7] torture: Trace long read-side delays Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-11-14 18:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/7] torture: Trace long read-side delays "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-11-14 19:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/7] torture: Trace long read-side delays Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-11-14 20:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/7] Miscellaneous fixes for 4.10 Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-11-14 18:30 +0100
csiph-web