Re: [PATCH 2/4] irq_work: Provide a irq work that can be processedon any cpu

[Jan Kara]

On Thu 07-11-13 23:13:39, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/11/7 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>:
> > Provide new irq work flag - IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND - meaning that can be
> > processed on any cpu. This flag implies IRQ_WORK_LAZY so that things are
> > simple and we don't have to pick any particular cpu to do the work. We
> > just do the work from a timer tick on whichever cpu it happens first.
> > This is useful as a lightweight and simple code path without locking or
> > other dependencies to offload work to other cpu if possible.
> >
> > We will use this type of irq work to make a guarantee of forward
> > progress of printing to a (serial) console when printing on one cpu
> > would cause interrupts to be disabled for too long.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/irq_work.h |  2 ++
> >  kernel/irq_work.c        | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >  2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/irq_work.h b/include/linux/irq_work.h
> > index 66017028dcb3..ca07a16355ed 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/irq_work.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/irq_work.h
> > @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
> >  #define IRQ_WORK_BUSY          2UL
> >  #define IRQ_WORK_FLAGS         3UL
> >  #define IRQ_WORK_LAZY          4UL /* Doesn't want IPI, wait for tick */
> > +#define __IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND      8UL /* Use IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND instead! */
> > +#define IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND       (__IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND | IRQ_WORK_LAZY) /* Any cpu can process this work */
> >
> >  struct irq_work {
> >         unsigned long flags;
> > diff --git a/kernel/irq_work.c b/kernel/irq_work.c
> > index 55fcce6065cf..b06350b63c67 100644
> > --- a/kernel/irq_work.c
> > +++ b/kernel/irq_work.c
> > @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@
> >  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct llist_head, irq_work_list);
> >  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, irq_work_raised);
> >
> > +/* List of irq-work any CPU can pick up */
> > +static LLIST_HEAD(unbound_irq_work_list);
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Claim the entry so that no one else will poke at it.
> >   */
> > @@ -70,12 +73,16 @@ void irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *work)
> >         /* Queue the entry and raise the IPI if needed. */
> >         preempt_disable();
> >
> > -       llist_add(&work->llnode, &__get_cpu_var(irq_work_list));
> > +       if (work->flags & __IRQ_WORK_UNBOUND)
> > +               llist_add(&work->llnode, &unbound_irq_work_list);
> > +       else
> > +               llist_add(&work->llnode, &__get_cpu_var(irq_work_list));
> >
> >         /*
> >          * If the work is not "lazy" or the tick is stopped, raise the irq
> >          * work interrupt (if supported by the arch), otherwise, just wait
> > -        * for the next tick.
> > +        * for the next tick. We do this even for unbound work to make sure
> > +        * *some* CPU will be doing the work.
> >          */
> >         if (!(work->flags & IRQ_WORK_LAZY) || tick_nohz_tick_stopped()) {
> >                 if (!this_cpu_cmpxchg(irq_work_raised, 0, 1))
> > @@ -100,28 +107,17 @@ bool irq_work_needs_cpu(void)
> >         return true;
> >  }
> >
> > -static void __irq_work_run(void)
> > +static void process_irq_work_list(struct llist_head *llhead)
> >  {
> >         unsigned long flags;
> >         struct irq_work *work;
> > -       struct llist_head *this_list;
> >         struct llist_node *llnode;
> >
> > -
> > -       /*
> > -        * Reset the "raised" state right before we check the list because
> > -        * an NMI may enqueue after we find the list empty from the runner.
> > -        */
> > -       __this_cpu_write(irq_work_raised, 0);
> > -       barrier();
> > -
> > -       this_list = &__get_cpu_var(irq_work_list);
> > -       if (llist_empty(this_list))
> > +       if (llist_empty(llhead))
> >                 return;
> >
> >         BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled());
> > -
> > -       llnode = llist_del_all(this_list);
> > +       llnode = llist_del_all(llhead);
> >         while (llnode != NULL) {
> >                 work = llist_entry(llnode, struct irq_work, llnode);
> >
> > @@ -146,6 +142,19 @@ static void __irq_work_run(void)
> >         }
> >  }
> >
> > +static void __irq_work_run(void)
> > +{
> > +       /*
> > +        * Reset the "raised" state right before we check the list because
> > +        * an NMI may enqueue after we find the list empty from the runner.
> > +        */
> > +       __this_cpu_write(irq_work_raised, 0);
> > +       barrier();
> > +
> > +       process_irq_work_list(&__get_cpu_var(irq_work_list));
> > +       process_irq_work_list(&unbound_irq_work_list);
> > +}
> > +
> 
> But then, who's going to process that work if every CPUs is idle?
  Have a look into irq_work_queue(). There is:
        /*
         * If the work is not "lazy" or the tick is stopped, raise the irq
         * work interrupt (if supported by the arch), otherwise, just wait
         * for the next tick. We do this even for unbound work to make sure
         * *some* CPU will be doing the work.
         */
        if (!(work->flags & IRQ_WORK_LAZY) || tick_nohz_tick_stopped()) {
                if (!this_cpu_cmpxchg(irq_work_raised, 0, 1))
                        arch_irq_work_raise();
        }

  So we raise an interrupt if there would be no timer ticking (which is
what I suppose you mean by "CPU is idle"). That is nothing changed by my
patches...
								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/