From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Theodore Y . Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, RCU <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sonymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/24] rcu/tree: Support reclaim for head-less object
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 08:31:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200504153147.GL2869@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200504142153.GG17577@pc636>
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 04:21:53PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If we are not doing single-pointer allocation, then that would also eliminate
> > > > entering the low-level page allocator for single-pointer allocations.
> > > >
> > > > Or did you mean entry into the allocator for the full-page allocations
> > > > related to the pointer array for PREEMPT_RT? Even if we skip entry into the
> > > > allocator for those, we will still have additional caching which further
> > > > reduces chances of getting a full page. In the event of such failure, we can
> > > > simply queue the rcu_head.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > I was just trying to guess why you kept the single-pointer allocation.
> > > It looks like I guessed wrong. ;-)
> > >
> > > If, as you say above, you make it go straight to synchronize_rcu()
> > > upon full-page allocation failure, that would be good!
> >
> > Paul, sounds good. Vlad, are you also Ok with that?
> >
> OK, let's drop it and keep it simple :)
>
> BTW, for PREEMPT_RT we still can do a page allocation for single
> argument of kvfree_rcu(). In case of double we just revert everything
> to the rcu_head if no cache.
>
> For single argument we can drop the lock before the entry to the page
> allocator. Because it follows might_sleep() anotation we avoid of having
> a situation when spinlock(rt mutex) is taken from any atomic context.
>
> Since the lock is dropped the current context can be interrupted by
> an IRQ which in its turn can also call kvfree_rcu() on current CPU.
> In that case it must be double argument(single is not allowed) kvfree_rcu()
> call. For PREEMPT_RT if no cache everything is reverted to rcu_head usage,
> i.e. the entry to page allocator is bypassed.
>
> It can be addressed as a separate patch and send out later on if we
> are on the same page.
>
> Paul, Joel what are your opinions?
I strongly prefer that it be removed from the series. I do understand
that this is a bit more hassle right now, but this does help avoid
confusion in the future, plus perhaps also avoiding issues with future
bisections.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-04 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-28 20:58 [PATCH 00/24] Introduce kvfree_rcu(1 or 2 arguments) Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 01/24] rcu/tree: Keep kfree_rcu() awake during lock contention Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 02/24] rcu/tree: Skip entry into the page allocator for PREEMPT_RT Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 03/24] rcu/tree: Use consistent style for comments Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 19:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-01 20:52 ` Joe Perches
2020-05-03 23:44 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 0:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:34 ` Joe Perches
2020-05-04 0:41 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-03 23:52 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 0:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:39 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 04/24] rcu/tree: Repeat the monitor if any free channel is busy Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 05/24] rcu/tree: Simplify debug_objects handling Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 06/24] rcu/tree: Simplify KFREE_BULK_MAX_ENTR macro Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 07/24] rcu/tree: move locking/unlocking to separate functions Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 08/24] rcu/tree: Use static initializer for krc.lock Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 21:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 12:10 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 09/24] rcu/tree: cache specified number of objects Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 21:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 12:43 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-04 15:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 17:48 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-04 18:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 18:08 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 19:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 19:37 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 19:51 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-04 20:15 ` joel
2020-05-04 20:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-05 11:03 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 10/24] rcu/tree: add rcutree.rcu_min_cached_objs description Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 22:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 12:44 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 11/24] rcu/tree: Maintain separate array for vmalloc ptrs Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 21:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-03 23:42 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 0:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:58 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 2:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 14:25 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 12/24] rcu/tiny: support vmalloc in tiny-RCU Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 13/24] rcu: Rename rcu_invoke_kfree_callback/rcu_kfree_callback Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 14/24] rcu: Rename __is_kfree_rcu_offset() macro Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 15/24] rcu: Rename kfree_call_rcu() to the kvfree_call_rcu() Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 16/24] mm/list_lru.c: Rename kvfree_rcu() to local variant Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 17/24] rcu: Introduce 2 arg kvfree_rcu() interface Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 18/24] mm/list_lru.c: Remove kvfree_rcu_local() function Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 19/24] rcu/tree: Support reclaim for head-less object Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:12 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 0:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:32 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 14:21 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-04 15:31 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2020-05-04 16:56 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-04 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 12:57 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:58 ` [PATCH 20/24] rcu/tree: Make kvfree_rcu() tolerate any alignment Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 23:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:24 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 0:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:31 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 12:56 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:59 ` [PATCH 21/24] rcu/tiny: move kvfree_call_rcu() out of header Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 23:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 12:45 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-06 18:29 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-05-06 18:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-07 17:34 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:59 ` [PATCH 22/24] rcu/tiny: support reclaim for head-less object Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-05-01 23:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-05-04 0:27 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-05-04 12:45 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-04-28 20:59 ` [PATCH 23/24] rcu: Introduce 1 arg kvfree_rcu() interface Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2020-04-28 20:59 ` [PATCH 24/24] lib/test_vmalloc.c: Add test cases for kvfree_rcu() Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
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=20200504153147.GL2869@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=oleksiy.avramchenko@sonymobile.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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).