mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, trenn@novell.com,
	prarit@redhat.com, tj@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	youquan.song@intel.com, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2 1/2] stop_machine: enable __stop_machine() to be called from the cpu online path
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 21:20:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110608192049.GB12457@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110607201425.083758186@sbsiddha-MOBL3.sc.intel.com>


Rusty, Tejun, what do you think about the patch below?

Thanks,

	Ingo

* Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> wrote:

> Currently stop machine infrastructure can be called only from a cpu that is
> online. But for !CONFIG_SMP, we do allow calling __stop_machine() before the
> cpu is online.
> 
> x86 for example requires stop machine infrastructure in the cpu online path
> and currently implements its own stop machine (using stop_one_cpu_nowait())
> for MTRR initialization in the cpu online path.
> 
> Enhance the __stop_machine() so that it can be called before the cpu
> is onlined. This will pave the way for code consolidation and address potential
> deadlocks caused by multiple mechanisms of doing system wide rendezvous.
> 
> This will also address the behavioral differences of __stop_machine()
> between SMP and UP builds.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
> Cc: stable@kernel.org    # v2.6.35+
> ---
>  kernel/stop_machine.c |   62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/kernel/stop_machine.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/kernel/stop_machine.c
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/kernel/stop_machine.c
> @@ -136,12 +136,35 @@ void stop_one_cpu_nowait(unsigned int cp
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(stop_cpus_mutex);
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_stop_work, stop_cpus_work);
>  
> +/**
> + * __stop_cpus - stop multiple cpus
> + * @cpumask: cpus to stop
> + * @fn: function to execute
> + * @arg: argument to @fn
> + *
> + * Execute @fn(@arg) on online cpus in @cpumask. If @cpumask is NULL, @fn
> + * is run on all the online cpus including the current cpu (even if it
> + * is not online).
> + * On each target cpu, @fn is run in a process context (except when run on
> + * the cpu that is in the process of coming online, in which case @fn is run
> + * in the same context as __stop_cpus()) with the highest priority
> + * preempting any task on the cpu and monopolizing it.  This function
> + * returns after all executions are complete.
> + */
>  int __stop_cpus(const struct cpumask *cpumask, cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *arg)
>  {
> +	int online = percpu_read(cpu_stopper.enabled);
> +	int include_this_offline = 0;
>  	struct cpu_stop_work *work;
>  	struct cpu_stop_done done;
> +	unsigned int weight;
>  	unsigned int cpu;
>  
> +	if (!cpumask) {
> +		cpumask = cpu_online_mask;
> +		include_this_offline = 1;
> +	}
> +
>  	/* initialize works and done */
>  	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask) {
>  		work = &per_cpu(stop_cpus_work, cpu);
> @@ -149,7 +172,12 @@ int __stop_cpus(const struct cpumask *cp
>  		work->arg = arg;
>  		work->done = &done;
>  	}
> -	cpu_stop_init_done(&done, cpumask_weight(cpumask));
> +
> +	weight = cpumask_weight(cpumask);
> +	if (!online && include_this_offline)
> +		weight++;
> +
> +	cpu_stop_init_done(&done, weight);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Disable preemption while queueing to avoid getting
> @@ -162,7 +190,20 @@ int __stop_cpus(const struct cpumask *cp
>  				    &per_cpu(stop_cpus_work, cpu));
>  	preempt_enable();
>  
> -	wait_for_completion(&done.completion);
> +	if (online)
> +		wait_for_completion(&done.completion);
> +	else {
> +		/*
> +		 * This cpu is not yet online. If @fn needs to be run on this
> +		 * cpu, run it now. Also, we can't afford to sleep here,
> +		 * so poll till the work is completed on all the cpu's.
> +		 */
> +		if (include_this_offline)
> +			fn(arg);
> +		while (atomic_read(&done.nr_todo) > 1)
> +			cpu_relax();
> +	}
> +
>  	return done.executed ? done.ret : -ENOENT;
>  }
>  
> @@ -431,6 +472,7 @@ static int stop_machine_cpu_stop(void *d
>  	struct stop_machine_data *smdata = data;
>  	enum stopmachine_state curstate = STOPMACHINE_NONE;
>  	int cpu = smp_processor_id(), err = 0;
> +	unsigned long flags = 0;
>  	bool is_active;
>  
>  	if (!smdata->active_cpus)
> @@ -446,7 +488,7 @@ static int stop_machine_cpu_stop(void *d
>  			curstate = smdata->state;
>  			switch (curstate) {
>  			case STOPMACHINE_DISABLE_IRQ:
> -				local_irq_disable();
> +				local_irq_save(flags);
>  				hard_irq_disable();
>  				break;
>  			case STOPMACHINE_RUN:
> @@ -460,7 +502,7 @@ static int stop_machine_cpu_stop(void *d
>  		}
>  	} while (curstate != STOPMACHINE_EXIT);
>  
> -	local_irq_enable();
> +	local_irq_restore(flags);
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> @@ -470,9 +512,19 @@ int __stop_machine(int (*fn)(void *), vo
>  					    .num_threads = num_online_cpus(),
>  					    .active_cpus = cpus };
>  
> +	/* Include the calling cpu that might not be online yet. */
> +	if (!percpu_read(cpu_stopper.enabled))
> +		smdata.num_threads++;
> +
>  	/* Set the initial state and stop all online cpus. */
>  	set_state(&smdata, STOPMACHINE_PREPARE);
> -	return stop_cpus(cpu_online_mask, stop_machine_cpu_stop, &smdata);
> +
> +	if (percpu_read(cpu_stopper.enabled))
> +		return stop_cpus(cpu_online_mask, stop_machine_cpu_stop,
> +				 &smdata);
> +	else
> +		return __stop_cpus(NULL, stop_machine_cpu_stop,
> +				   &smdata);
>  }
>  
>  int stop_machine(int (*fn)(void *), void *data, const struct cpumask *cpus)
> 

-- 
Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-08 19:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-07 20:14 [patch v2 0/2] enhance stop machine infrastructure for MTRR rendezvous sequence Suresh Siddha
2011-06-07 20:14 ` [patch v2 1/2] stop_machine: enable __stop_machine() to be called from the cpu online path Suresh Siddha
2011-06-08 19:20   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2011-06-09  9:54   ` Tejun Heo
2011-06-09 22:50     ` Suresh Siddha
2011-06-07 20:14 ` [patch v2 2/2] x86, mtrr: use __stop_machine() for doing MTRR rendezvous Suresh Siddha

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=20110608192049.GB12457@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=prarit@redhat.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=stable@kernel.org \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=trenn@novell.com \
    --cc=youquan.song@intel.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®