Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 11/11] rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirqto kthread

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 05:50:46PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:39:40PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Drop to non-real-time priority and yield, but only after posting a
> > + * timer that will cause us to regain our real-time priority if we
> > + * remain preempted.  Either way, we restore our real-time priority
> > + * before returning.
> > + */
> > +static void rcu_yield(int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_sched_state.rda, cpu);
> > +	struct sched_param sp;
> > +	struct timer_list yield_timer;
> > +
> > +	setup_timer(&yield_timer, rcu_cpu_kthread_timer, (unsigned long)rdp);
> > +	mod_timer(&yield_timer, jiffies + 2);
> > +	sp.sched_priority = 0;
> > +	sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_NORMAL, &sp);
> > +	schedule();
> > +	sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> > +	sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_FIFO, &sp);
> > +	del_timer(&yield_timer);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Handle cases where the rcu_cpu_kthread() ends up on the wrong CPU.
> > + * This can happen while the corresponding CPU is either coming online
> > + * or going offline.  We cannot wait until the CPU is fully online
> > + * before starting the kthread, because the various notifier functions
> > + * can wait for RCU grace periods.  So we park rcu_cpu_kthread() until
> > + * the corresponding CPU is online.
> > + *
> > + * Return 1 if the kthread needs to stop, 0 otherwise.
> > + *
> > + * Caller must disable bh.  This function can momentarily enable it.
> > + */
> > +static int rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop(int cpu)
> > +{
> > +	while (cpu_is_offline(cpu) || smp_processor_id() != cpu) {
> > +		if (kthread_should_stop())
> > +			return 1;
> > +		local_bh_enable();
> > +		schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
> 
> Why is it uninterruptible? Well that doesn't change much anyway.
> It can be a problem for long time sleeping kernel threads because of
> the hung task detector, but certainly not for 1 jiffy.

Yep, and the next patch does in fact change this to
schedule_timeout_interruptible().

Good eyes, though!

							Thanx, Paul

> > +		if (smp_processor_id() != cpu)
> > +			set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(cpu));
> > +		local_bh_disable();
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Per-CPU kernel thread that invokes RCU callbacks.  This replaces the
> > + * earlier RCU softirq.
> > + */
> > +static int rcu_cpu_kthread(void *arg)
> > +{
> > +	int cpu = (int)(long)arg;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> > +	int spincnt = 0;
> > +	wait_queue_head_t *wqp = &per_cpu(rcu_cpu_wq, cpu);
> > +	char work;
> > +	char *workp = &per_cpu(rcu_cpu_has_work, cpu);
> > +
> > +	for (;;) {
> > +		wait_event_interruptible(*wqp,
> > +					 *workp != 0 || kthread_should_stop());
> > +		local_bh_disable();
> > +		if (rcu_cpu_kthread_should_stop(cpu)) {
> > +			local_bh_enable();
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +		local_irq_save(flags);
> > +		work = *workp;
> > +		*workp = 0;
> > +		local_irq_restore(flags);
> > +		if (work)
> > +			rcu_process_callbacks();
> > +		local_bh_enable();
> > +		if (*workp != 0)
> > +			spincnt++;
> > +		else
> > +			spincnt = 0;
> > +		if (spincnt > 10) {
> > +			rcu_yield(cpu);
> > +			spincnt = 0;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Per-rcu_node kthread, which is in charge of waking up the per-CPU
> > + * kthreads when needed.
> > + */
> > +static int rcu_node_kthread(void *arg)
> > +{
> > +	int cpu;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> > +	unsigned long mask;
> > +	struct rcu_node *rnp = (struct rcu_node *)arg;
> > +	struct sched_param sp;
> > +	struct task_struct *t;
> > +
> > +	for (;;) {
> > +		wait_event_interruptible(rnp->node_wq, rnp->wakemask != 0 ||
> > +						       kthread_should_stop());
> > +		if (kthread_should_stop())
> > +			break;
> > +		raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rnp->lock, flags);
> > +		mask = rnp->wakemask;
> > +		rnp->wakemask = 0;
> > +		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
> > +		for (cpu = rnp->grplo; cpu <= rnp->grphi; cpu++, mask <<= 1) {
> > +			if ((mask & 0x1) == 0)
> > +				continue;
> > +			preempt_disable();
> > +			per_cpu(rcu_cpu_has_work, cpu) = 1;
> > +			t = per_cpu(rcu_cpu_kthread_task, cpu);
> > +			if (t == NULL) {
> > +				preempt_enable();
> > +				continue;
> > +			}
> > +			sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> > +			sched_setscheduler_nocheck(t, cpu, &sp);
> > +			wake_up_process(t);
> 
> My (mis?)understanding of the picture is this node kthread is there to
> wake up cpu threads that called rcu_yield(). But actually rcu_yield()
> doesn't make the cpu thread sleeping, instead it switches to SCHED_NORMAL,
> to avoid starving the system with callbacks.
> 
> So I wonder if this wake_up_process() is actually relevant.
> sched_setscheduler_nocheck() already handles the per sched policy rq migration
> and the process is not sleeping.
> 
> That said, by the time the process may have gone to sleep, because if no other
> SCHED_NORMAL task was there, it has just continued and may have flushed
> every callbacks. So this wake_up_process() may actually wake up the task
> but it will sleep again right away due to the condition in wait_event_interruptible()
> of the cpu thread.
> 
> Right?
> 
> > +			preempt_enable();
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/