All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] tick: Remove pointless cpu valid check in hotplug code
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 23:31:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201211223155.GC595642@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201206212002.582579516@linutronix.de>

On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 10:12:54PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> tick_handover_do_timer() which is invoked when a CPU is unplugged has a
> check for cpumask_first(cpu_online_mask) when it tries to hand over the
> tick update duty.
> 
> Checking the result of cpumask_first() there is pointless because if the
> online mask is empty at this point, then this would be the last CPU in the
> system going offline, which is impossible. There is always at least one CPU
> remaining. If online mask would be really empty then the timer duty would
> be the least of the resulting problems.
> 
> Remove the well meant check simply because it is pointless and confusing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-common.c |   10 +++-------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> @@ -407,17 +407,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tick_broadcast_oneshot
>  /*
>   * Transfer the do_timer job away from a dying cpu.
>   *
> - * Called with interrupts disabled. Not locking required. If
> + * Called with interrupts disabled. No locking required. If
>   * tick_do_timer_cpu is owned by this cpu, nothing can change it.
>   */
>  void tick_handover_do_timer(void)
>  {
> -	if (tick_do_timer_cpu == smp_processor_id()) {
> -		int cpu = cpumask_first(cpu_online_mask);
> -
> -		tick_do_timer_cpu = (cpu < nr_cpu_ids) ? cpu :
> -			TICK_DO_TIMER_NONE;
> -	}
> +	if (tick_do_timer_cpu == smp_processor_id())
> +		tick_do_timer_cpu = cpumask_first(cpu_online_mask);
>  }

BTW since we have that, why do we need:

static bool can_stop_idle_tick(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts)
{
	/*
	 * If this CPU is offline and it is the one which updates
	 * jiffies, then give up the assignment and let it be taken by
	 * the CPU which runs the tick timer next. If we don't drop
	 * this here the jiffies might be stale and do_timer() never
	 * invoked.
	 */
	if (unlikely(!cpu_online(cpu))) {
		if (cpu == tick_do_timer_cpu)
			tick_do_timer_cpu = TICK_DO_TIMER_NONE;


We should only enter idle with an offline CPU after calling
tick_handover_do_timer() so (cpu == tick_do_timer_cpu) shouldn't be possible.

Or am I missing something?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-12-11 23:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-06 21:12 [patch 0/3] tick: Annotate and document the intentionaly racy tick_do_timer_cpu Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-06 21:12 ` [patch 1/3] tick: Remove pointless cpu valid check in hotplug code Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 11:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-07 17:44     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-11 22:21   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-12-12  0:16     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-12  1:20       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-12-11 22:31   ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2020-12-16 10:50   ` [tip: timers/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-06 21:12 ` [patch 2/3] tick/sched: Remove bogus boot "safety" check Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-11 22:41   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-12-16 10:50   ` [tip: timers/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-06 21:12 ` [patch 3/3] tick: Annotate tick_do_timer_cpu data races Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 12:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-07 17:46     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 18:19       ` Marco Elver
2020-12-07 19:43         ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 19:44         ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-07 21:46           ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 22:38             ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-07 22:46               ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-07 22:55                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-08  8:11           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-08 15:03             ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-16  0:27               ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-16 21:19                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-16 21:23                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-12-16 21:32                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-17 10:48                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-17 14:59                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-12-08  8:01         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-07 11:05 ` [patch 0/3] tick: Annotate and document the intentionaly racy tick_do_timer_cpu Marco Elver

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=20201211223155.GC595642@lothringen \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [patch 1/3] tick: Remove pointless cpu valid check in hotplug code' \
    /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

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.