From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
To: paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] rcu: avoid leaking exp_deferred_qs into next GP
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 02:19:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2cf71e70-4cb3-57f8-f542-69ddf04106dd@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191031134351.GO20975@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
On 2019/10/31 9:43 下午, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:07:56AM +0000, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> If exp_deferred_qs is incorrectly set and leaked to the next
>> exp GP, it may cause the next GP to be incorrectly prematurely
>> completed.
>
> Could you please provide the sequence of events leading to a such a
> failure?
I just felt nervous with "leaking" exp_deferred_qs.
I didn't careful consider the sequence of events.
Now it proves that I must have misunderstood the exp_deferred_qs.
So call "leaking" is wrong concept, preempt_disable()
is considered as rcu_read_lock() and exp_deferred_qs
needs to be set.
Thanks
Lai
============don't need to read:
read_read_lock()
// other cpu start exp GP_A
preempt_schedule() // queue itself
read_read_unlock() //report qs, other cpu is sending ipi to me
preempt_disable
rcu_exp_handler() interrupt for GP_A and leave a exp_deferred_qs
// exp GP_A finished
---------------above is one possible way to leave a exp_deferred_qs
preempt_enable()
interrupt before preempt_schedule()
read_read_lock()
read_read_unlock()
NESTED interrupt when nagative rcu_read_lock_nesting
read_read_lock()
// other cpu start exp GP_B
NESTED interrupt for rcu_flavor_sched_clock_irq()
report exq qs since rcu_read_lock_nesting <0 and \
exp_deferred_qs is true
// exp GP_B complete
read_read_unlock()
This plausible sequence relies on NESTED interrupt too,
and can be avoided by patch2 if NESTED interrupt were allowed.
>
> Also, did you provoke such a failure in testing? If so, an upgrade
> to rcutorture would be good, so please tell me what you did to make
> the failure happen.
>
> I do like the reduction in state space, but I am a bit concerned about
> the potential increase in contention on rnp->lock. Thoughts?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
>> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
>> index a0e1e51c51c2..6dec21909b30 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
>> @@ -603,6 +603,18 @@ static void rcu_exp_handler(void *unused)
>> struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode;
>> struct task_struct *t = current;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Note that there is a large group of race conditions that
>> + * can have caused this quiescent state to already have been
>> + * reported, so we really do need to check ->expmask first.
>> + */
>> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
>> + if (!(rnp->expmask & rdp->grpmask)) {
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
>> +
>> /*
>> * First, the common case of not being in an RCU read-side
>> * critical section. If also enabled or idle, immediately
>> @@ -628,17 +640,10 @@ static void rcu_exp_handler(void *unused)
>> * a future context switch. Either way, if the expedited
>> * grace period is still waiting on this CPU, set ->deferred_qs
>> * so that the eventual quiescent state will be reported.
>> - * Note that there is a large group of race conditions that
>> - * can have caused this quiescent state to already have been
>> - * reported, so we really do need to check ->expmask.
>> */
>> if (t->rcu_read_lock_nesting > 0) {
>> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
>> - if (rnp->expmask & rdp->grpmask) {
>> - rdp->exp_deferred_qs = true;
>> - t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.exp_hint = true;
>> - }
>> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
>> + rdp->exp_deferred_qs = true;
>> + WRITE_ONCE(t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.exp_hint, true);
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> --
>> 2.20.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-31 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-31 10:07 [PATCH 00/11] rcu: introduce percpu rcu_preempt_depth Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 10:07 ` [PATCH 01/11] rcu: avoid leaking exp_deferred_qs into next GP Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 13:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 18:19 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2019-10-31 19:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:07 ` [PATCH 02/11] rcu: fix bug when rcu_exp_handler() in nested interrupt Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 13:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 14:20 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 14:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 15:14 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 18:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-01 0:19 ` Boqun Feng
2019-11-01 2:29 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 10:07 ` [PATCH 03/11] rcu: clean up rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore() Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 13:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 15:25 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 19:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:07 ` [PATCH 04/11] rcu: cleanup rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 14:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 14:35 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 15:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 18:33 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 22:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 05/11] rcu: clean all rcu_read_unlock_special after report qs Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-01 11:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 06/11] rcu: clear t->rcu_read_unlock_special in one go Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-01 12:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-01 16:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 07/11] rcu: set special.b.deferred_qs before wake_up() Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 08/11] rcu: don't use negative ->rcu_read_lock_nesting Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-01 12:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-16 13:04 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-17 21:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-18 1:54 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-18 14:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 09/11] rcu: wrap usages of rcu_read_lock_nesting Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 10/11] rcu: clear the special.b.need_qs in rcu_note_context_switch() Lai Jiangshan
2019-10-31 10:08 ` [PATCH 11/11] x86,rcu: use percpu rcu_preempt_depth Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-01 12:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-01 13:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-01 14:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-01 15:32 ` Lai Jiangshan
2019-11-01 16:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-11-01 15:47 ` Lai Jiangshan
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=2cf71e70-4cb3-57f8-f542-69ddf04106dd@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=laijs@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).