linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>,
	Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>,
	Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>
Subject: Re: [v7 4/8] smp: add func to IPI cpus based on parameter func
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:57:25 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120127155725.86654035.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1327572121-13673-5-git-send-email-gilad@benyossef.com>

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:01:57 +0200
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com> wrote:

> Add the on_each_cpu_cond() function that wraps on_each_cpu_mask()
> and calculates the cpumask of cpus to IPI by calling a function supplied
> as a parameter in order to determine whether to IPI each specific cpu.
> 
> The function works around allocation failure of cpumask variable in
> CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y by itereating over cpus sending an IPI a
> time via smp_call_function_single().
> 
> The function is useful since it allows to seperate the specific
> code that decided in each case whether to IPI a specific cpu for
> a specific request from the common boilerplate code of handling
> creating the mask, handling failures etc.
> 
> ...
>
> @@ -153,6 +162,16 @@ static inline int up_smp_call_function(smp_call_func_t func, void *info)
>  			local_irq_enable();		\
>  		}					\
>  	} while (0)
> +#define on_each_cpu_cond(cond_func, func, info, wait, gfpflags) \
> +	do {						\
> +		preempt_disable();			\
> +		if (cond_func(0, info)) {		\
> +			local_irq_disable();		\
> +			(func)(info);			\
> +			local_irq_enable();		\

Ordinarily, local_irq_enable() in such a low-level thing is dangerous,
because it can cause horrid bugs when called from local_irq_disable()d
code.

However I think we're OK here because it is a bug to call on_each_cpu()
and friends with local irqs disabled, yes?

Do we have any warnings printks if someone calls the ipi-sending
functions with local interrupts disabled?  I didn't see any, but didn't
look very hard.

If my above claims are correct then why does on_each_cpu() use
local_irq_save()?  hrm.

> +		}					\
> +		preempt_enable();			\
> +	} while (0)
>  
>  static inline void smp_send_reschedule(int cpu) { }
>  #define num_booting_cpus()			1
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
> index a081e6c..fa0912a 100644
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -730,3 +730,61 @@ void on_each_cpu_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, smp_call_func_t func,
>  	put_cpu();
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(on_each_cpu_mask);
> +
> +/*
> + * on_each_cpu_cond(): Call a function on each processor for which
> + * the supplied function cond_func returns true, optionally waiting
> + * for all the required CPUs to finish. This may include the local
> + * processor.
> + * @cond_func:	A callback function that is passed a cpu id and
> + *		the the info parameter. The function is called
> + *		with preemption disabled. The function should
> + *		return a blooean value indicating whether to IPI
> + *		the specified CPU.
> + * @func:	The function to run on all applicable CPUs.
> + *		This must be fast and non-blocking.
> + * @info:	An arbitrary pointer to pass to both functions.
> + * @wait:	If true, wait (atomically) until function has
> + *		completed on other CPUs.
> + * @gfpflags:	GFP flags to use when allocating the cpumask
> + *		used internally by the function.
> + *
> + * The function might sleep if the GFP flags indicates a non
> + * atomic allocation is allowed.
> + *
> + * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or
> + * from a hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler.
> + */
> +void on_each_cpu_cond(bool (*cond_func)(int cpu, void *info),
> +			smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait,
> +			gfp_t gfpflags)

bah.

z:/usr/src/linux-3.3-rc1> grep -r gfpflags . | wc -l
78
z:/usr/src/linux-3.3-rc1> grep -r gfp_flags . | wc -l 
548

> +{
> +	cpumask_var_t cpus;
> +	int cpu, ret;
> +
> +	might_sleep_if(gfpflags & __GFP_WAIT);

For the zalloc_cpumask_var(), it seems.  I expect there are
might_sleep() elsewhere in the memory allocation paths, but putting one
here will detect bugs even if CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n.

> +	if (likely(zalloc_cpumask_var(&cpus, (gfpflags|__GFP_NOWARN)))) {
> +		preempt_disable();
> +		for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> +			if (cond_func(cpu, info))
> +				cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpus);
> +		on_each_cpu_mask(cpus, func, info, wait);
> +		preempt_enable();
> +		free_cpumask_var(cpus);
> +	} else {
> +		/*
> +		 * No free cpumask, bother. No matter, we'll
> +		 * just have to IPI them one by one.
> +		 */
> +		preempt_disable();
> +		for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> +			if (cond_func(cpu, info)) {
> +				ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu, func,
> +								info, wait);
> +				WARN_ON_ONCE(!ret);
> +			}
> +		preempt_enable();
> +	}
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(on_each_cpu_cond);

I assume the preempt_disable()s here are to suspend CPU hotplug?


  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-27 23:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-26 10:01 [v7 0/8] Reduce cross CPU IPI interference Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 1/8] smp: introduce a generic on_each_cpu_mask function Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-29 12:24   ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-30 21:52     ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-31  6:33       ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 2/8] arm: move arm over to generic on_each_cpu_mask Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 3/8] tile: move tile to use " Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 4/8] smp: add func to IPI cpus based on parameter func Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-27 23:57   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-01-29 12:04     ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 5/8] slub: only IPI CPUs that have per cpu obj to flush Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 15:09   ` Christoph Lameter
2012-01-26 10:01 ` [v7 6/8] fs: only send IPI to invalidate LRU BH when needed Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 10:02 ` [v7 7/8] mm: only IPI CPUs to drain local pages if they exist Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 15:13   ` Christoph Lameter
2012-01-28  0:12   ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-29 12:18     ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-30 21:49       ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-31  6:32         ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-30 14:59   ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-30 15:14     ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-30 15:44       ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-26 10:02 ` [v7 8/8] mm: add vmstat counters for tracking PCP drains Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-01-26 15:19 ` [v7 0/8] Reduce cross CPU IPI interference Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-29  8:25   ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-01 17:04     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-02  8:46       ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-02 15:41         ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-05 11:46           ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-10 18:39             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-10 20:13               ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-10 20:29                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-10 20:39                   ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-10 18:33           ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-10 20:33             ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-15 21:50             ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-15 22:15               ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-15 23:44                 ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-21  1:34               ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-03-01 18:27                 ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-10 18:38           ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-10 20:24             ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-15 15:11               ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-15 15:19                 ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-15 21:51               ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-02 16:24         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-02 16:29           ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-09 15:52             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-09 15:59               ` Chris Metcalf
2012-02-09 18:11                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-09 16:26               ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-09 18:32                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-01 17:35     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-01 17:57       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-02  9:42         ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-01 18:40       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-01 20:06         ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-01 20:13           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-02  9:34             ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-02 15:34               ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-02 16:14                 ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-02 17:01                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-02 17:23                     ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-02 17:51                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-05 12:16                         ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-05 16:59                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-09 15:22                             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-09 16:05                               ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-09 18:22                                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-09 23:41                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-10  1:39                                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-14 13:18                                       ` Avi Kivity
2012-02-21  0:02                                         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-02-02 17:25                     ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-05 12:06                       ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-02-06 18:19                         ` Christoph Lameter
2012-02-09 15:37                           ` Frederic Weisbecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120127155725.86654035.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=gilad@benyossef.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
    --cc=levinsasha928@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=miltonm@bga.com \
    --cc=mina86@mina86.com \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).