From: Scott Wood <swood@redhat.com>
To: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] rcu/tree: Try to invoke_rcu_core() if in_irq() during unlock
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 19:14:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b12aa6442bd12c725beb8e381083e6880dbd9206.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190818214948.GA134430@google.com>
On Sun, 2019-08-18 at 17:49 -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> When we're in hard interrupt context in rcu_read_unlock_special(), we
> can still benefit from invoke_rcu_core() doing wake ups of rcuc
> threads when the !use_softirq parameter is passed. This is safe
> to do so because:
What is the benefit, beyond skipping the irq work overhead? Is there some
reason to specifically want the rcuc thread woken rather than just getting
into the scheduler (and thus rcu_note_context_switch) as soon as possible?
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-20 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-18 21:49 [RFC v2] rcu/tree: Try to invoke_rcu_core() if in_irq() during unlock Joel Fernandes (Google)
2019-08-18 22:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-18 22:32 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-18 22:35 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-18 23:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-18 23:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-19 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-19 1:41 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-19 1:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-19 2:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-19 12:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-19 14:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-19 15:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-19 16:25 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-21 14:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-21 14:56 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-21 15:26 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-21 15:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-21 15:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-21 15:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-08-21 15:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-08-20 0:14 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2019-08-20 1:40 ` Joel Fernandes
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=b12aa6442bd12c725beb8e381083e6880dbd9206.camel@redhat.com \
--to=swood@redhat.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@linux.ibm.com \
--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).