From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@intel.com>,
Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@redhat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: Drop rcu usage for MMIO mappings
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 09:18:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gQNPNOmSVrp7epS5_10qLUuGbutQ2xz7LXnpEhkWeA_w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gq55A7880dOJD7skwx7mnjsqbCqEGFvEo552U9W2zH3Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:32 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 1:55 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Recently a performance problem was reported for a process invoking a
> > non-trival ASL program. The method call in this case ends up
> > repetitively triggering a call path like:
> >
> > acpi_ex_store
> > acpi_ex_store_object_to_node
> > acpi_ex_write_data_to_field
> > acpi_ex_insert_into_field
> > acpi_ex_write_with_update_rule
> > acpi_ex_field_datum_io
> > acpi_ex_access_region
> > acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch
> > acpi_ex_system_memory_space_handler
> > acpi_os_map_cleanup.part.14
> > _synchronize_rcu_expedited.constprop.89
> > schedule
> >
> > The end result of frequent synchronize_rcu_expedited() invocation is
> > tiny sub-millisecond spurts of execution where the scheduler freely
> > migrates this apparently sleepy task. The overhead of frequent scheduler
> > invocation multiplies the execution time by a factor of 2-3X.
> >
> > For example, performance improves from 16 minutes to 7 minutes for a
> > firmware update procedure across 24 devices.
> >
> > Perhaps the rcu usage was intended to allow for not taking a sleeping
> > lock in the acpi_os_{read,write}_memory() path which ostensibly could be
> > called from an APEI NMI error interrupt?
>
> Not really.
>
> acpi_os_{read|write}_memory() end up being called from non-NMI
> interrupt context via acpi_hw_{read|write}(), respectively, and quite
> obviously ioremap() cannot be run from there, but in those cases the
> mappings in question are there in the list already in all cases and so
> the ioremap() isn't used then.
>
> RCU is there to protect these users from walking the list while it is
> being updated.
>
> > Neither rcu_read_lock() nor ioremap() are interrupt safe, so add a WARN_ONCE() to validate that rcu
> > was not serving as a mechanism to avoid direct calls to ioremap().
>
> But it would produce false-positives if the IRQ context was not NMI,
> wouldn't it?
>
> > Even the original implementation had a spin_lock_irqsave(), but that is not
> > NMI safe.
>
> Which is not a problem (see above).
>
> > APEI itself already has some concept of avoiding ioremap() from
> > interrupt context (see erst_exec_move_data()), if the new warning
> > triggers it means that APEI either needs more instrumentation like that
> > to pre-emptively fail, or more infrastructure to arrange for pre-mapping
> > the resources it needs in NMI context.
>
> Well, I'm not sure about that.
Right, this patch set is about 2-3 generations behind the architecture
of the fix we are discussing internally, you might mention that.
The fix we are looking at now is to pre-map operation regions in a
similar manner as the way APEI resources are pre-mapped. The
pre-mapping would arrange for synchronize_rcu_expedited() to be elided
on each dynamic mapping attempt. The other piece is to arrange for
operation-regions to be mapped at their full size at once rather than
a page at a time.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-05 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-07 23:39 [PATCH v2] ACPI: Drop rcu usage for MMIO mappings Dan Williams
2020-06-05 13:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-05 16:18 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2020-06-05 16:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-05 16:39 ` Dan Williams
2020-06-05 17:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-05 14:06 ` [RFT][PATCH] ACPI: OSL: Use rwlock instead of RCU for memory management Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-05 17:08 ` Dan Williams
2020-06-06 6:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-08 15:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-08 16:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-05 19:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-06-06 6:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-10 12:17 ` [RFT][PATCH 0/3] ACPI: ACPICA / OSL: Avoid unmapping ACPI memory inside of the AML interpreter Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-10 12:20 ` [RFT][PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Defer unmapping of memory used in memory opregions Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-10 12:21 ` [RFT][PATCH 2/3] ACPICA: Remove unused memory mappings on interpreter exit Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-12 0:12 ` Kaneda, Erik
2020-06-12 12:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-13 19:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-15 19:06 ` Dan Williams
2020-06-10 12:22 ` [RFT][PATCH 3/3] ACPI: OSL: Define ACPI_OS_MAP_MEMORY_FAST_PATH() Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-13 19:19 ` [RFT][PATCH 0/3] ACPI: ACPICA / OSL: Avoid unmapping ACPI memory inside of the AML interpreter Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 13:50 ` [RFT][PATCH v2 0/4] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 13:52 ` [RFT][PATCH v2 1/4] ACPICA: Defer unmapping of opregion memory if supported by OS Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 13:53 ` [RFT][PATCH v2 2/4] ACPI: OSL: Add support for deferred unmapping of ACPI memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 14:56 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-06-22 15:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 15:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-06-22 14:01 ` [RFT][PATCH v2 3/4] ACPICA: Preserve memory opregion mappings if supported by OS Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 22:53 ` Kaneda, Erik
2020-06-29 13:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-22 14:02 ` [RFT][PATCH v2 4/4] ACPI: OSL: Implement acpi_os_map_memory_fast_path() Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 17:28 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 0/4] ACPI: ACPICA / OSL: Avoid unmapping ACPI memory inside of the AML interpreter Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 17:31 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 1/4] ACPICA: Take deferred unmapping of memory into account Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 17:31 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 2/4] ACPI: OSL: Implement deferred unmapping of ACPI memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 17:32 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 3/4] ACPICA: Preserve memory opregion mappings if supported by OS Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 17:33 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 4/4] ACPI: OSL: Implement acpi_os_map_memory_fast_path() Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-26 18:41 ` [RFT][PATCH v3 0/4] ACPI: ACPICA / OSL: Avoid unmapping ACPI memory inside of the AML interpreter Dan Williams
2020-06-28 17:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-29 20:46 ` Dan Williams
2020-06-30 11:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-29 16:31 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-29 16:33 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] ACPI: OSL: Implement deferred unmapping of ACPI memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-29 16:33 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ACPICA: Preserve memory opregion mappings Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-29 20:57 ` Al Stone
2020-06-30 11:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-30 15:31 ` Al Stone
2020-06-30 15:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-06-30 19:57 ` Al Stone
2020-07-16 19:22 ` Verma, Vishal L
2020-07-19 19:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=CAPcyv4gQNPNOmSVrp7epS5_10qLUuGbutQ2xz7LXnpEhkWeA_w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=erik.kaneda@intel.com \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=myron.stowe@redhat.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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).