From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>,
mingo@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, bristot@redhat.com,
zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com, tj@kernel.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/cpuacct: optimize away RCU read lock
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 16:21:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309002159.GA3774636@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220308234403.GC4285@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:44:03PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 12:32:25AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 12:20:33AM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > > On 20.02.2022 06:14, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> > > > Since cpuacct_charge() is called from the scheduler update_curr(),
> > > > we must already have rq lock held, then the RCU read lock can
> > > > be optimized away.
> > > >
> > > > And do the same thing in it's wrapper cgroup_account_cputime(),
> > > > but we can't use lockdep_assert_rq_held() there, which defined
> > > > in kernel/sched/sched.h.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
> > >
> > > This patch landed recently in linux-next as commit dc6e0818bc9a
> > > ("sched/cpuacct: Optimize away RCU read lock"). On my test systems I
> > > found that it triggers a following warning in the early boot stage:
> > >
> > > Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value calculated using timer
> > > frequency.. 48.00 BogoMIPS (lpj=240000)
> > > pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301
> > > Mount-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes, linear)
> > > Mountpoint-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes, linear)
> > > CPU: Testing write buffer coherency: ok
> > > CPU0: Spectre v2: using BPIALL workaround
> > >
> > > =============================
> > > WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> > > 5.17.0-rc5-00050-gdc6e0818bc9a #11458 Not tainted
> > > -----------------------------
> > > ./include/linux/cgroup.h:481 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> >
> > Arguably, with the flavours folded again, rcu_dereference_check() ought
> > to default include rcu_read_lock_sched_held() or its equivalent I
> > suppose.
> >
> > Paul?
>
> That would reduce the number of warnings, but it also would hide bugs.
>
> So, are you sure you really want this?
Of course, if you are designing a use case that really expects multiple
types of readers...
Another approach might be rcu_dereference_brs(), but hopefully with a
better name, that checks for either rcu_read_lock(), disabled BH, or
disabled preemption. Or if you are looking only for rcu_read_lock()
or disabled preemption, rcu_dereference_rs(), again hopefully with a
better name.
Is that what you had in mind?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-09 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-20 5:14 [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/cpuacct: fix charge percpu cpuusage Chengming Zhou
2022-02-20 5:14 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/cpuacct: optimize away RCU read lock Chengming Zhou
2022-03-01 15:24 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Optimize " tip-bot2 for Chengming Zhou
[not found] ` <CGME20220308232034eucas1p2b0f39cee0f462af6004ebdfbe5bacb9f@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
2022-03-08 23:20 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/cpuacct: optimize " Marek Szyprowski
2022-03-08 23:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-08 23:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-03-09 0:21 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2022-03-10 8:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-10 15:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-03-12 12:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-12 17:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-03-09 3:08 ` [External] " Chengming Zhou
2022-02-20 5:14 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] sched/cpuacct: remove redundant " Chengming Zhou
2022-03-01 15:24 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Remove " tip-bot2 for Chengming Zhou
[not found] ` <CGME20220308233107eucas1p119a2f5a8d4f5b5eec38ea8dde92b3368@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2022-03-08 23:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] sched/cpuacct: remove " Marek Szyprowski
2022-02-22 18:01 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] sched/cpuacct: fix charge percpu cpuusage Tejun Heo
2022-02-23 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-01 15:24 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Fix " tip-bot2 for Chengming Zhou
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=20220309002159.GA3774636@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=zhouchengming@bytedance.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).