mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Keep gpnum and completed fields synchronized
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:02:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101210230200.GK2125@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1292015471-19227-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:11:11PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> When a CPU that was in an extended quiescent state wakes
> up and catches up with grace periods that remote CPUs
> completed on its behalf, we update the completed field
> but not the gpnum that keeps a stale value of a backward
> grace period ID.
> 
> Later, note_new_gpnum() will interpret the shift between
> the local CPU and the node grace period ID as some new grace
> period to handle and will then start to hunt quiescent state.
> 
> But if every grace periods have already been completed, this
> interpretation becomes broken. And we'll be stuck in clusters
> of spurious softirqs because rcu_report_qs_rdp() will make
> this broken state run into infinite loop.
> 
> The solution, as suggested by Lai Jiangshan, is to ensure that
> the gpnum and completed fields are well synchronized when we catch
> up with completed grace periods on their behalf by other cpus.
> This way we won't start noting spurious new grace periods.

Also good, queued!

One issue -- this approach is vulnerable to overflow.  I therefore
followed up with a patch that changes the condition to

	if (ULONG_CMP_LT(rdp->gpnum, rdp->completed))

And I clearly need to make RCU defend itself against the scenario where
a CPU stays in dyntick-idle mode long enough for the grace-period number
to wrap halfway around its range of possible values.  Not a problem at
the moment, and never will be for 64-bit systems, but...

I will fix that up.

							Thanx, Paul

> Suggested-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org
> ---
>  kernel/rcutree.c |    9 +++++++++
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index 8c4ed60..2e16da3 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -683,6 +683,15 @@ __rcu_process_gp_end(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp, struct rcu_dat
>  		rdp->completed = rnp->completed;
> 
>  		/*
> +		 * If we were in an extended quiescent state, we may have
> +		 * missed some grace periods that others CPUs took care on
> +		 * our behalf. Catch up with this state to avoid noting
> +		 * spurious new grace periods.
> +		 */
> +		if (rdp->completed > rdp->gpnum)
> +			rdp->gpnum = rdp->completed;
> +
> +		/*
>  		 * If another CPU handled our extended quiescent states and
>  		 * we have no more grace period to complete yet, then stop
>  		 * chasing quiescent states.
> -- 
> 1.7.3.2
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-12-10 23:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-10 21:11 [PATCH 0/2 v2] rcu: Fix series of spurious RCU softirqs Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-10 21:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] rcu: Stop chasing QS if another CPU did it for us Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-10 22:58   ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-10 23:33     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-10 21:14 ` [PATCH 0/2 v2] rcu: Fix series of spurious RCU softirqs Frederic Weisbecker
     [not found] ` <1292015471-19227-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
2010-12-10 23:02   ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-12-10 23:39     ` [PATCH 2/2] rcu: Keep gpnum and completed fields synchronized Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-10 23:47       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11  0:04         ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11  0:15           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11  0:58             ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11  1:21               ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11  6:36                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11  0:00     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-12-11  0:48       ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-11  0:51         ` Frederic Weisbecker

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=20101210230200.GK2125@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

Powered by JetHome