From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org, 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,
rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/17] rcu/tree: Skip entry into the page allocator for PREEMPT_RT
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 16:12:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200702141216.r4rbt5w3hjzafpgg@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200630183534.GG9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
On 2020-06-30 11:35:34 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > This is not going to work together with the "wait context validator"
> > (CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING). As of -rc3 it should complain about
> > printk() which is why it is still disabled by default.
>
> Fixing that should be "interesting". In particular, RCU CPU stall
> warnings rely on the raw spin lock to reduce false positives due
> to race conditions. Some thought will be required here.
I don't get this part. Can you explain/give me an example where to look
at?
> > So assume that this is fixed and enabled then on !PREEMPT_RT it will
> > complain that you have a raw_spinlock_t acquired (the one from patch
> > 02/17) and attempt to acquire a spinlock_t in the memory allocator.
>
> Given that the slab allocator doesn't acquire any locks until it gets
> a fair way in, wouldn't it make sense to allow a "shallow" allocation
> while a raw spinlock is held? This would require yet another GFP_ flag,
> but that won't make all that much of a difference in the total. ;-)
That would be one way of dealing with. But we could go back to
spinlock_t and keep the memory allocation even for RT as is. I don't see
a downside of this. And we would worry about kfree_rcu() from real
IRQ-off region once we get to it.
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > > bnode = (struct kfree_rcu_bulk_data *)
> > > __get_free_page(GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NOWARN);
> > > }
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-02 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-24 20:12 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/17] kfree_rcu updates for v5.9 Paul E. McKenney
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/17] rcu: Fix a kernel-doc warnings for "count" paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/17] rcu/tree: Keep kfree_rcu() awake during lock contention paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/17] rcu/tree: Skip entry into the page allocator for PREEMPT_RT paulmck
2020-06-30 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-06-30 18:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-07-02 14:12 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2020-07-02 16:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-07-02 20:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-07-06 21:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-07-07 17:34 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-07-07 18:45 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-07-08 18:48 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-07-02 19:45 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-07-06 19:42 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-07-06 19:55 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-07-06 20:29 ` Joel Fernandes
2020-07-07 9:27 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-07-15 13:38 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-07-15 14:16 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-07-15 14:20 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/17] rcu/tree: Repeat the monitor if any free channel is busy paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/17] rcu/tree: Make debug_objects logic independent of rcu_head paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/17] rcu/tree: Simplify KFREE_BULK_MAX_ENTR macro paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/17] rcu/tree: Move kfree_rcu_cpu locking/unlocking to separate functions paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/17] rcu/tree: Use static initializer for krc.lock paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/17] rcu/tree: cache specified number of objects paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/17] rcu/tree: Maintain separate array for vmalloc ptrs paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/17] rcu/tiny: support vmalloc in tiny-RCU paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/17] rcu: Rename *_kfree_callback/*_kfree_rcu_offset/kfree_call_* paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/17] mm/list_lru.c: Rename kvfree_rcu() to local variant paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/17] rcu: Introduce 2 arg kvfree_rcu() interface paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/17] rcu: Support reclaim for head-less object paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 16/17] rcu: Introduce single argument kvfree_rcu() interface paulmck
2020-06-24 20:12 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 17/17] lib/test_vmalloc.c: Add test cases for kvfree_rcu() paulmck
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=20200702141216.r4rbt5w3hjzafpgg@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
/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).