From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DC2C10DCE for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 00:06:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E57F2073E for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 00:06:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelfernandes.org header.i=@joelfernandes.org header.b="ZYeIvFFS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727393AbgCXAGp (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 20:06:45 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com ([209.85.160.194]:32910 "EHLO mail-qt1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727290AbgCXAGo (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 20:06:44 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id c14so1128342qtp.0 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:06:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=l6iyFi0DdET9Ro8DJXjL2rBhmAO8aGkXKclfaXq9KNQ=; b=ZYeIvFFSkdWNqbZJG7Njo1YepQZEN3wdUUT5OWgC9L+UTYtD+bpgjSdEq/drXAgpgf i/MNibkdHeYrbj84NVyQrAfAsaJt7qRKZ6joVFR29RTsdqxynn6unX8RKVkW/mQ6hukQ aUNEPJQEyYLDNddhE80Im51+yEwpbFOB/KvZo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=l6iyFi0DdET9Ro8DJXjL2rBhmAO8aGkXKclfaXq9KNQ=; b=CqsbptGxQ+3OmHbL/LWaVbkTP+bADrjyYRK7urE3HKxLkspKH4+N9wQJBcaXvhYIol ovz983/eKF9AODuE2u1PfyNr/cFstTtK+kLG/j+iMb3w6mL1k1HH3GFdD/LqBmJ/MA1t wmWGGiAu22YNg17tu3PEhvFj1kfGfRNOSjwlTj0LvCN/WNTizuu/poIta7oKXyHORMqB m8BskWpFTGDqNsYcBmIKptSrOJe8k9V2dm4Ef8mmyiT9frtnd2GqZ8jVzQGvVS1c7wnN n5ZP8KOIwTW0lHNrt28MYcqD/nRWEKjgX40ZrcBiHSus9FF8N6fdObAR+P35U3oMGnGP OvXA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3rku/6io3/xZ9nDDu8YxhhLZ4oGLK8omKfMoM6754MPgzgwMl2 4mXzcTmLmMSzZbQVTLI6WmgbXQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vv3eiOjVDm85hAJbrOzgpuQWu0OCDFCNOOmajIc86zloeMFmkLOfdZhheoieJPO37foxurylQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e94:: with SMTP id 20mr18725347qtp.314.1585008401620; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:6:12:9c46:e0da:efbf:69cc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w4sm11187978qkc.122.2020.03.23.17.06.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 20:06:39 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 tip/core/rcu 01/22] sched/core: Add function to sample state of locked-down task Message-ID: <20200324000639.GA29340@google.com> References: <20200319001024.GA28798@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200319001100.24917-1-paulmck@kernel.org> <20200319132238.75a034c3@gandalf.local.home> <20200319173525.GI3199@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200320024943.GA29649@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200320024943.GA29649@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) Sender: rcu-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: rcu@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 07:49:43PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: [...] > Thanx, Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > commit e26a234c1205bf02b62b62cd7f15f8086fc0b13b > Author: Paul E. McKenney > Date: Thu Mar 19 15:33:12 2020 -0700 > > rcu-tasks: Avoid IPIing userspace/idle tasks if kernel is so built > > Systems running CPU-bound real-time task do not want IPIs sent to CPUs > executing nohz_full userspace tasks. Battery-powered systems don't > want IPIs sent to idle CPUs in low-power mode. Unfortunately, RCU tasks > trace can and will send such IPIs in some cases. > > Both of these situations occur only when the target CPU is in RCU > dyntick-idle mode, in other words, when RCU is not watching the > target CPU. This suggests that CPUs in dyntick-idle mode should use > memory barriers in outermost invocations of rcu_read_lock_trace() > and rcu_read_unlock_trace(), which would allow the RCU tasks trace > grace period to directly read out the target CPU's read-side state. > One challenge is that RCU tasks trace is not targeting a specific > CPU, but rather a task. And that task could switch from one CPU to > another at any time. > > This commit therefore uses try_invoke_on_locked_down_task() > and checks for task_curr() in trc_inspect_reader_notrunning(). > When this condition holds, the target task is running and cannot move. > If CONFIG_TASKS_TRACE_RCU_READ_MB=y, the new rcu_dynticks_zero_in_eqs() > function can be used to check if the specified integer (in this case, > t->trc_reader_nesting) is zero while the target CPU remains in that same > dyntick-idle sojourn. If so, the target task is in a quiescent state. > If not, trc_read_check_handler() must indicate failure so that the > grace-period kthread can take appropriate action or retry after an > appropriate delay, as the case may be. > > With this change, given CONFIG_TASKS_TRACE_RCU_READ_MB=y, if a given > CPU remains idle or a given task continues executing in nohz_full mode, > the RCU tasks trace grace-period kthread will detect this without the > need to send an IPI. > > Suggested-by: Mathieu Desnoyers > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h > index e1089fd..296f926 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h > @@ -501,6 +501,7 @@ void srcutorture_get_gp_data(enum rcutorture_type test_type, > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_TINY_RCU > +static inline bool rcu_dynticks_zero_in_eqs(int cpu, int *vp) { return false; } > static inline unsigned long rcu_get_gp_seq(void) { return 0; } > static inline unsigned long rcu_exp_batches_completed(void) { return 0; } > static inline unsigned long > @@ -510,6 +511,7 @@ static inline void show_rcu_gp_kthreads(void) { } > static inline int rcu_get_gp_kthreads_prio(void) { return 0; } > static inline void rcu_fwd_progress_check(unsigned long j) { } > #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TINY_RCU */ > +bool rcu_dynticks_zero_in_eqs(int cpu, int *vp); > unsigned long rcu_get_gp_seq(void); > unsigned long rcu_exp_batches_completed(void); > unsigned long srcu_batches_completed(struct srcu_struct *sp); > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h > index d31ed74..36f03d3 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h > @@ -802,22 +802,38 @@ static void trc_read_check_handler(void *t_in) > /* Callback function for scheduler to check non-running) task. */ > static bool trc_inspect_reader_notrunning(struct task_struct *t, void *arg) This function name is a bit confusing. The task could be running when this function is called. Below you are detecting that the task is running, by calling task_curr(). Maybe just trc_inspect_reader() is better? [..] > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h > index 44edd0a..43991a4 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h > @@ -455,6 +455,8 @@ static void rcu_bind_gp_kthread(void); > static bool rcu_nohz_full_cpu(void); > static void rcu_dynticks_task_enter(void); > static void rcu_dynticks_task_exit(void); > +static void rcu_dynticks_task_trace_enter(void); > +static void rcu_dynticks_task_trace_exit(void); > > /* Forward declarations for tree_stall.h */ > static void record_gp_stall_check_time(void); > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > index 9355536..f4a344e 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > @@ -2553,3 +2553,21 @@ static void rcu_dynticks_task_exit(void) > WRITE_ONCE(current->rcu_tasks_idle_cpu, -1); > #endif /* #if defined(CONFIG_TASKS_RCU) && defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL) */ > } > + > +/* Turn on heavyweight RCU tasks trace readers on idle/user entry. */ > +static void rcu_dynticks_task_trace_enter(void) > +{ > +#ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_TRACE > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TASKS_TRACE_RCU_READ_MB)) > + current->trc_reader_special.b.need_mb = true; If this is every called from middle of a reader section (that is we transition from IPI-mode to using heavier reader-sections), then is a memory barrier needed here just to protect the reader section that already started? thanks, - Joel > +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_TRACE */ > +} > + > +/* Turn off heavyweight RCU tasks trace readers on idle/user exit. */ > +static void rcu_dynticks_task_trace_exit(void) > +{ > +#ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_TRACE > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TASKS_TRACE_RCU_READ_MB)) > + current->trc_reader_special.b.need_mb = false; > +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_TRACE */ > +}