rcu.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
	mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH rcu 08/14] rcu: Move rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() to rcu_cpu_starting()
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:33:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210915233343.3906738-8-paulmck@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210915233305.GA3906641@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>

The purpose of rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() is to adjust the ->dynticks
counter of an incoming CPU when required.  It is currently invoked
from rcutree_prepare_cpu(), which runs before the incoming CPU is
running, and thus on some other CPU.  This makes the per-CPU accesses in
rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() iffy at best, and it all "works" only because
the running CPU cannot possibly be in dyntick-idle mode, which means
that rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() never has any effect.

It is currently OK for rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() to have no effect, but
only because the CPU-offline process just happens to leave ->dynticks in
the correct state.  After all, if ->dynticks were in the wrong state on a
just-onlined CPU, rcutorture would complain bitterly the next time that
CPU went idle, at least in kernels built with CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y,
for example, those built by rcutorture scenario TREE04.  One could
argue that this means that rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() is unnecessary,
however, removing it would make the CPU-online process vulnerable to
slight changes in the CPU-offline process.

One could also ask why it is safe to move the rcu_dynticks_eqs_online()
call so late in the CPU-online process.  Indeed, there was a time when it
would not have been safe, which does much to explain its current location.
However, the marking of a CPU as online from an RCU perspective has long
since moved from rcutree_prepare_cpu() to rcu_cpu_starting(), and all
that is required is that ->dynticks be set correctly by the time that
the CPU is marked as online from an RCU perspective.  After all, the RCU
grace-period kthread does not check to see if offline CPUs are also idle.
(In case you were curious, this is one reason why there is quiescent-state
reporting as part of the offlining process.)

This commit therefore moves the call to rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() from
rcutree_prepare_cpu() to rcu_cpu_starting(), this latter being guaranteed
to be running on the incoming CPU.  The call to this function must of
course be placed before this rcu_cpu_starting() announces this CPU's
presence to RCU.

Reported-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index e6e1b9281530..801075e36515 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -4129,7 +4129,6 @@ int rcutree_prepare_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
 	rdp->n_force_qs_snap = READ_ONCE(rcu_state.n_force_qs);
 	rdp->blimit = blimit;
 	rdp->dynticks_nesting = 1;	/* CPU not up, no tearing. */
-	rcu_dynticks_eqs_online();
 	raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rnp);		/* irqs remain disabled. */
 
 	/*
@@ -4249,6 +4248,7 @@ void rcu_cpu_starting(unsigned int cpu)
 	mask = rdp->grpmask;
 	WRITE_ONCE(rnp->ofl_seq, rnp->ofl_seq + 1);
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(!(rnp->ofl_seq & 0x1));
+	rcu_dynticks_eqs_online();
 	smp_mb(); // Pair with rcu_gp_cleanup()'s ->ofl_seq barrier().
 	raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
 	WRITE_ONCE(rnp->qsmaskinitnext, rnp->qsmaskinitnext | mask);
-- 
2.31.1.189.g2e36527f23


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-09-15 23:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-15 23:33 [PATCH rcu 0/14] Miscellaneous fixes for v5.16 Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 01/14] rcu: Mark accesses to rcu_state.n_force_qs Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 02/14] rcu-nocb: Fix a couple of tree_nocb code-style nits Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 03/14] rcu: Eliminate rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs() local variable rnhqp Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 04/14] rcu: Eliminate rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs() local variable ruqp Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 05/14] doc: Add another stall-warning root cause in stallwarn.rst Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 06/14] rcu: Fix undefined Kconfig macros Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 07/14] rcu: Comment rcu_gp_init() code waiting for CPU-hotplug operations Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 09/14] rcu: Simplify rcu_report_dead() call to rcu_report_exp_rdp() Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 10/14] rcu: Make rcutree_dying_cpu() use its "cpu" parameter Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-16  7:28   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 11/14] rcu: Make rcu_normal_after_boot writable again Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-16  7:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-16 13:57     ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-16 14:27       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-16 16:53         ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 12/14] rcu: Make rcu update module parameters world-readable Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 13/14] rcu: Fix existing exp request check in sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup() Paul E. McKenney
2021-09-15 23:33 ` [PATCH rcu 14/14] rcu: Avoid unneeded function call in rcu_read_unlock() Paul E. McKenney

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=20210915233343.3906738-8-paulmck@kernel.org \
    --to=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH rcu 08/14] rcu: Move rcu_dynticks_eqs_online() to rcu_cpu_starting()' \
    /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

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).