mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_struct->exclusive mode
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 22:41:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131004204159.GT3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131004195623.GA19436@redhat.com>

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:56:23PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Hmm. perhaps you meant that this should be done before rcu_sync_enter()
> increments ->gp_count. Perhaps this can work, but the code will be more
> complex and this way rcu_sync_exit() will always schedule the callback?

Yah, however see below.

> And again, we do want to increment ->gp_count asap to disable this cb
> if it is already pending.

Ah indeed, I forgot about that. We'd have to wait until we'd get
scheduled to increment gp_count again. However I think we can fix this
and the above problem by introduction of rcu_sync_busy() which checks
for eiter gp_count or pending waiters.

But yes, slightly more complex code :/

That would yield something like so I suppose:

void rcu_sync_enter(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss)
{
	bool need_wait, need_sync;

	spin_lock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);
	if (rss->exclusive && rss->gp_count) {
		__wait_event_locked(rss->gp_wait, rss->gp_count);
		rss->gp_count++;
		need_wait = need_sync = false;
	} else {
		need_wait = rss->gp_count++;
		need_sync = rss->gp_state == GP_IDLE;
		if (need_sync)
			rss->gp_state = GP_PENDING;
	}
	spin_unlock_irq(&rss->lock);

	if (need_sync) {
		rss->sync();
		rss->gp_state = GP_PASSED;
		wake_up_all(&rss->gp_wait);
	} else if (need_wait) {
		wait_event(rss->gp_wait, rss->gp_state == GP_PASSED);
	} else {
		BUG_ON(rss->gp_state != GP_PASSED);
	}
}

static bool rcu_sync_busy(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss)
{
	return rss->gp_count ||
		(rss->exclusive && waitqueue_active(&rss->gp_wait));
}

static void rcu_sync_func(struct rcu_head *rcu)
{
	struct rcu_sync_struct *rss =
		container_of(rcu, struct rcu_sync_struct, cb_head);
	unsigned long flags;

	BUG_ON(rss->gp_state != GP_PASSED);
	BUG_ON(rss->cb_state == CB_IDLE);

	spin_lock_irqsave(&rss->rss_lock, flags);
	if (rcu_sync_busy(rss)) {
		/*
		 * A new rcu_sync_begin() has happened; drop the callback.
		 */
		rss->cb_state = CB_IDLE;
	} else if (rss->cb_state == CB_REPLAY) {
		/*
		 * A new rcu_sync_exit() has happened; requeue the callback
		 * to catch a later GP.
		 */
		rss->cb_state = CB_PENDING;
		rss->call(&rss->cb_head, rcu_sync_func);
	} else {
		/*
		 * We're at least a GP after rcu_sync_exit(); eveybody will now
		 * have observed the write side critical section. Let 'em rip!.
		 */
		rss->cb_state = CB_IDLE;
		rss->gp_state = GP_IDLE;
	}
	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rss->rss_lock, flags);
}

void rcu_sync_exit(struct rcu_sync_struct *rss)
{
	spin_lock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);
	if (!--rss->gp_count) {
		if (!rcu_sync_busy(rss)) {
			if (rss->cb_state == CB_IDLE) {
				rss->cb_state = CB_PENDING;
				rss->call(&rss->cb_head, rcu_sync_func);
			} else if (rss->cb_state == CB_PENDING) {
				rss->cb_state = CB_REPLAY;
			}
		} else {
			__wake_up_locked(&rss->gp_wait, TASK_NORMAL, 1);
		}
	}
	spin_unlock_irq(&rss->rss_lock);
}

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-04 20:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-04 18:46 [PATCH 0/5] rcusync: validations + dtor + exclusive Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 1/5] rcusync: introduce struct rcu_sync_ops Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:12   ` Linus Torvalds
2013-10-04 19:22     ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:30     ` Steven Rostedt
2013-10-04 19:38       ` Linus Torvalds
2013-10-04 19:42         ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-05 17:21           ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-05 17:17         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-08  9:13           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-08 15:33             ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-08 16:34               ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 2/5] rcusync: add the CONFIG_PROVE_RCU checks Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 3/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_dtor() Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 4/5] rcusync: introduce rcu_sync_struct->exclusive mode Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:29   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 19:56     ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 20:41       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-10-06 13:22         ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-07 10:49           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 18:46 ` [PATCH 5/5] rcusync: make rcu_sync_enter() return "bool" Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-04 19:32 ` [PATCH 0/5] rcusync: validations + dtor + exclusive Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-04 21:28   ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-05 17:22   ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20131004204159.GT3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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

Powered by JetHome