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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 06C7AC3A5A3 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:06:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57E92173E for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:06:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelfernandes.org header.i=@joelfernandes.org header.b="xbJ3LuWX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726678AbfH0QGX (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 12:06:23 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:46381 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726536AbfH0QGX (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 12:06:23 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id c2so12017409plz.13 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 09:06:22 -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=1L35nAsSCuH9O7ksDDdD2gjCKxQPbQrMSvK9pHg5hLg=; b=xbJ3LuWXwg3Nq02nn3AbHTU8VpTOZaJrBe1s/K+wwywtZ//0Ww372OwQEHTOSDkOau b7RZBBOJ1Yu3BM3pCc/YmFO479ZR0A1oNwpQ9pocN4sv+4RMNpue5t/iXM3I6Gf/ZWoa iEvU0kcH1H93WoH9os8MK16JA2+RRpTrapdcQ= 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=1L35nAsSCuH9O7ksDDdD2gjCKxQPbQrMSvK9pHg5hLg=; b=KckMggQ9eA0osH9uQ3KvVnLyXUmrS/LqU4ynXGbDlAaVEg4mZpbn47yZpI4jEPbd09 IhlDUFEj0WWhq+ZKCPnKUFsi66iNt0IqADOH38Ziqid0eIZPhE4tcHl7zNqt/oGiin9t XMzGApET3Qxt22JpXeHuXUj0/vU3vdQBoToLEgpGyNrdc6AonZjf+JTzUplKBE2OfRZO w5zO2I+OkxjcGGtifNWnjSGM7aEWMaTRdjtDwWoB6cKlycd4vf5i9F6dqd+HxR9YMYAN xejTlBY0hdobXM9WGHW+JsyWd8IxfTFbKaDhxcTvWohpOOLO23D5usIbiWKx2rMbaPbq YrdQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUd4M+AvdmPDEsYo51fm60iy6a7mpR0xujcLdkQBbYLGNLtZTwF jbcLwLPbZECYf7jsk0EjL9iYsA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyaGmwKpA/k2W0bQmgxlBgAXYTJvuTo9aOtY8wLvfxOIFa1djzD+hu7oJ/bQ7x4GWt8LdNDvw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f30e:: with SMTP id gb14mr25331225plb.32.1566921981880; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 09:06:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:6:12:9c46:e0da:efbf:69cc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y10sm3143262pjp.27.2019.08.27.09.06.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 09:06:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 12:06:19 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Scott Wood , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Clark Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH RT v2 2/3] sched: migrate_enable: Use sleeping_lock to indicate involuntary sleep Message-ID: <20190827160619.GA55873@google.com> References: <20190821231906.4224-1-swood@redhat.com> <20190821231906.4224-3-swood@redhat.com> <20190823162024.47t7br6ecfclzgkw@linutronix.de> <433936e4c720e6b81f9b297fefaa592fd8a961ad.camel@redhat.com> <20190824031014.GB2731@google.com> <20190826152523.dcjbsgyyir4zjdol@linutronix.de> <20190826162945.GE28441@linux.ibm.com> <20190827092333.jp3darw7teyyw67g@linutronix.de> <20190827130853.GB132568@google.com> <20190827155813.GG26530@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190827155813.GG26530@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:58:13AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 09:08:53AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:23:33AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > [snip] > > > > However, if this was instead an rcu_read_lock() critical section within > > > > a PREEMPT=y kernel, then if a schedule() occured within stop_one_task(), > > > > RCU would consider that critical section to be preempted. This means > > > > that any RCU grace period that is blocked by this RCU read-side critical > > > > section would remain blocked until stop_one_cpu() resumed, returned, > > > > and so on until the matching rcu_read_unlock() was reached. In other > > > > words, RCU would consider that RCU read-side critical section to span > > > > the call to stop_one_cpu() even if stop_one_cpu() invoked schedule(). > > > > > > Isn't that my example from above and what we do in RT? My understanding > > > is that this is the reason why we need BOOST on RT otherwise the RCU > > > critical section could remain blocked for some time. > > > > Not just for boost, it is needed to block the grace period itself on > > PREEMPT=y. On PREEMPT=y, if rcu_note_context_switch() happens in middle of a > > rcu_read_lock() reader section, then the task is added to a blocked list > > (rcu_preempt_ctxt_queue). Then just after that, the CPU reports a QS state > > (rcu_qs()) as you can see in the PREEMPT=y implementation of > > rcu_note_context_switch(). Even though the CPU has reported a QS, the grace > > period will not end because the preempted (or block as could be in -rt) task > > is still blocking the grace period. This is fundamental to the function of > > Preemptible-RCU where there is the concept of tasks blocking a grace period, > > not just CPUs. > > > > I think what Paul is trying to explain AIUI (Paul please let me know if I > > missed something): > > > > (1) Anyone calling rcu_note_context_switch() and expecting it to respect > > RCU-readers that are readers as a result of interrupt disabled regions, have > > incorrect expectations. So calling rcu_note_context_switch() has to be done > > carefully. > > > > (2) Disabling interrupts is "generally" implied as an RCU-sched flavor > > reader. However, invoking rcu_note_context_switch() from a disabled interrupt > > region is *required* for rcu_note_context_switch() to work correctly. > > > > (3) On PREEMPT=y kernels, invoking rcu_note_context_switch() from an > > interrupt disabled region does not mean that that the task will be added to a > > blocked list (unless it is also in an RCU-preempt reader) so > > rcu_note_context_switch() may immediately report a quiescent state and > > nothing blockings the grace period. > > So callers of rcu_note_context_switch() must be aware of this behavior. > > > > (4) On PREEMPT=n, unlike PREEMPT=y, there is no blocked list handling and so > > nothing will block the grace period once rcu_note_context_switch() is called. > > So any path calling rcu_note_context_switch() on a PREEMPT=n kernel, in the > > middle of something that is expected to be an RCU reader would be really bad > > from an RCU view point. > > > > Probably, we should add this all to documentation somewhere. > > I think that Sebastian understands this and was using the example of RCU > priority boosting to confirm his understanding. But documentation would > be good. Extremely difficult to keep current, but good. I believe that > the requirements document does cover this. Oh ok, got it. Sorry about the noise then! (In a way, I was just thinking out loud since this is a slightly confusing topic :-P and an archive link to this discussion serves a great purpose in my notes :-D :-)). thanks! - Joel