Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1647647
| From | Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU |
| Date | 2017-05-23 07:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tKaym-7e0-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <tIQim-2MD-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <tIQLo-3eE-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tIR4J-3uF-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tIVrH-6qG-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tK5yF-458-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, 22 May 2017 17:00:36 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:06:09PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:23:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017 10:04:21 -0400 > > > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017 06:35:50 -0700 > > > > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Simpler would be better! > > > > > > > > > > However, is it really guaranteed that one SCHED_IDLE thread > > > > > cannot preempt another? If not, then the trampoline-freeing > > > > > SCHED_IDLE thread might preempt some other SCHED_IDLE thread > > > > > in the middle of a trampoline. I am not seeing anything that > > > > > prevents such preemption, but it is rather early local time, > > > > > so I could easily be missing something. > > > > > > > > > > However, if SCHED_IDLE threads cannot preempt other threads, > > > > > even other SCHED_IDLE threads, then your approach sounds > > > > > quite promising to me. > > > > > > > > > > Steve, Peter, thoughts? > > > > > > > > SCHED_IDLE is the swapper task. There's one on each CPU, and > > > > they don't migrate. And they only get called when there's no > > > > other task running. > > > > > > Peter just "schooled" me on IRC. I stand corrected (and he may > > > respond to this email too). I guess any task can become > > > SCHED_IDLE. > > > > > > But that just makes this an even less likely option for > > > synchronize_rcu_tasks(). > > > > Hmmm... The goal is to make sure that any task that was preempted > > or running at a given point in time passes through a voluntary > > context switch (or userspace execution, or, ...). > > > > What is the simplest way to get this job done? To Ingo's point, I > > bet that there is a simpler way than the current TASKS_RCU > > implementation. > > > > Ingo, if I make it fit into 100 lines of code, would you be OK with > > it? I probably need a one-line hook at task-creation time and > > another at task-exit time, if that makes a difference. > > And please see below for such a patch, which does add (just barely) > fewer than 100 lines net. > > Unfortunately, it does not work, as I should have known ahead of time > from the dyntick-idle experience. Not all context switches go through > context_switch(). :-/ > > I believe this is fixable, more or less like dyntick-idle's > half-interrupts were fixable, but it will likely be a few days. Not > clear whether the result will be simpler than current TASKS_RCU, but > there is only one way to find out. ;-) > Hi Paul, I'm currently traveling and don't have the energy to look at code at the moment. Hopefully, I can look at this more on Thursday or Friday. Thanks! -- Steve
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-15 20:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-15 20:50 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-15 22:20 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-16 08:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-16 14:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-16 15:10 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> - 2017-05-24 11:40 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-19 08:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-19 15:40 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-19 16:10 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-19 16:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-19 21:10 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-23 02:10 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-23 07:30 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-23 17:40 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-23 21:50 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-23 22:10 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-05-23 22:50 +0200
Re: Use case for TASKS_RCU "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-05-23 23:20 +0200
csiph-web