Re: [PATCH 3.19 016/175] ksoftirqd: Enable IRQs and call cond_resched() before poking RCU

[Josh Hunt]

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 3.19-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@xxxxxx>
>
> commit 28423ad283d5348793b0c45cc9b1af058e776fd6 upstream.
>
> While debugging an issue with excessive softirq usage, I encountered the
> following note in commit 3e339b5dae24a706 ("softirq: Use hotplug thread
> infrastructure"):
>
>     [ paulmck: Call rcu_note_context_switch() with interrupts enabled. ]
>
> ...but despite this note, the patch still calls RCU with IRQs disabled.
>
> This seemingly innocuous change caused a significant regression in softirq
> CPU usage on the sending side of a large TCP transfer (~1 GB/s): when
> introducing 0.01% packet loss, the softirq usage would jump to around 25%,
> spiking as high as 50%. Before the change, the usage would never exceed 5%.
>
> Moving the call to rcu_note_context_switch() after the cond_sched() call,
> as it was originally before the hotplug patch, completely eliminated this
> problem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@xxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
>  kernel/softirq.c |    6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/softirq.c
> +++ b/kernel/softirq.c
> @@ -656,9 +656,13 @@ static void run_ksoftirqd(unsigned int c
>                  * in the task stack here.
>                  */
>                 __do_softirq();
> -               rcu_note_context_switch();
>                 local_irq_enable();
>                 cond_resched();
> +
> +               preempt_disable();
> +               rcu_note_context_switch();
> +               preempt_enable();
> +
>                 return;
>         }
>         local_irq_enable();
>
>
> --
> 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/

Sorry for the delay in noticing this, but should this be applied to
3.14-stable as well?

Thanks
Josh
--
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/