linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>,
	Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] nohz: only wakeup a single target cpu when kicking a task
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 01:40:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201014234053.GA86158@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201014083321.GA2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 10:33:21AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 02:13:28PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> 
> > > Yes but if the task isn't running, run_posix_cpu_timers() doesn't have
> > > anything to elapse. So indeed we can spare the IPI if the task is not
> > > running. Provided ordering makes sure that the task sees the new dependency
> > > when it schedules in of course.
> > 
> > True.
> > 
> >  * p->on_cpu <- { 0, 1 }:
> >  *
> >  *   is set by prepare_task() and cleared by finish_task() such that it will be
> >  *   set before p is scheduled-in and cleared after p is scheduled-out, both
> >  *   under rq->lock. Non-zero indicates the task is running on its CPU.
> > 
> > 
> > CPU-0 (tick_set_dep)            CPU-1 (task switch)
> > 
> > STORE p->tick_dep_mask
> > smp_mb() (atomic_fetch_or())
> > LOAD p->on_cpu
> > 
> > 
> >                                 context_switch(prev, next)
> >                                 STORE next->on_cpu = 1
> >                                 ...                             [*]
> > 
> >                                 LOAD current->tick_dep_mask
> > 
> 
> That load is in tick_nohz_task_switch() right? (which BTW is placed
> completely wrong) You could easily do something like the below I
> suppose.
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 81632cd5e3b7..2a5fafe66bb0 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -410,6 +410,14 @@ void __tick_nohz_task_switch(void)
>  	ts = this_cpu_ptr(&tick_cpu_sched);
>  
>  	if (ts->tick_stopped) {
> +		/*
> +		 * tick_set_dep()		(this)
> +		 *
> +		 * STORE p->tick_dep_mask	STORE p->on_cpu
> +		 * smp_mb()			smp_mb()
> +		 * LOAD p->on_cpu		LOAD p->tick_dep_mask
> +		 */
> +		smp_mb();
>  		if (atomic_read(&current->tick_dep_mask) ||
>  		    atomic_read(&current->signal->tick_dep_mask))
>  			tick_nohz_full_kick();

It would then need to be unconditional (whatever value of ts->tick_stopped).
Assuming the tick isn't stopped, we may well have an interrupt firing right
after schedule() which doesn't see the new value of tick_dep_map.

Alternatively, we could rely on p->on_rq which is set to TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED
at wake up time, prior to the schedule() full barrier. Of course that doesn't
mean that the task is actually the one running on the CPU but it's a good sign,
considering that we are running in nohz_full mode and it's usually optimized
for single task mode.

Also setting a remote task's tick dependency is only used by posix cpu timer
in case the user has the bad taste to enqueue on a task running in nohz_full
mode. It shouldn't deserve an unconditional full barrier in the schedule path.

If the target is current, as is used by RCU, I guess we can keep a special
treatment.

> re tick_nohz_task_switch() being placed wrong, it should probably be
> placed before finish_lock_switch(). Something like so.
> 
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index cf044580683c..5c92c959824f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4084,6 +4084,7 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
>  	vtime_task_switch(prev);
>  	perf_event_task_sched_in(prev, current);
>  	finish_task(prev);
> +	tick_nohz_task_switch();
>  	finish_lock_switch(rq);
>  	finish_arch_post_lock_switch();
>  	kcov_finish_switch(current);
> @@ -4121,7 +4122,6 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
>  		put_task_struct_rcu_user(prev);
>  	}
>  
> -	tick_nohz_task_switch();

IIRC, we wanted to keep it outside rq lock because it shouldn't it...

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-14 23:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-07 18:01 [patch 0/2] nohz_full: only wakeup target CPUs when notifying new tick dependency (v2) Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-07 18:01 ` [patch 1/2] nohz: only wakeup a single target cpu when kicking a task Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-08 12:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-08 17:54     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-08 19:54       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-13 17:13         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-14  8:33           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-14 23:40             ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2020-10-15 10:12               ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-26 14:42                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-20 18:52               ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-22 12:53                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-08 14:59   ` Peter Xu
2020-10-08 15:28     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-08 19:16       ` Peter Xu
2020-10-08 19:48       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-08 17:43     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-07 18:01 ` [patch 2/2] nohz: change signal tick dependency to wakeup CPUs of member tasks Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-08 12:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-08 18:04     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-08 19:11 [patch 0/2] nohz_full: only wakeup target CPUs when notifying new tick dependency (v3) Marcelo Tosatti
2020-10-08 19:11 ` [patch 1/2] nohz: only wakeup a single target cpu when kicking a task Marcelo Tosatti

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=20201014234053.GA86158@lothringen \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=nitesh@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@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).