From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F2FC43387 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B512A206B6 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727008AbfAIVTG (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:19:06 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:42162 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726659AbfAIVTB (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:19:01 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id x09LIhr3094008 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:19:00 -0500 Received: from e11.ny.us.ibm.com (e11.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.201]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2pwq4rme31-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:18:59 -0500 Received: from localhost by e11.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:58 -0000 Received: from b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.23) by e11.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.198) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:54 -0000 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x09LIreT24969284 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:53 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B69B2066; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC503B206A; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.70.82.88]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:18:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6CDDF16C6416; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 13:18:52 -0800 (PST) From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.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" Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/12] rcu: Consolidate PREEMPT and !PREEMPT synchronize_rcu_expedited() Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 13:18:47 -0800 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20190109211830.GA30595@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190109211830.GA30595@linux.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19010921-2213-0000-0000-000003399520 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00010374; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000274; SDB=6.01144142; UDB=6.00595706; IPR=6.00924404; MB=3.00025056; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-01-09 21:18:58 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19010921-2214-0000-0000-00005CE7F0F4 Message-Id: <20190109211850.31599-9-paulmck@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-01-09_10:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=828 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1901090170 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The CONFIG_PREEMPT=n and CONFIG_PREEMPT=y implementations of synchronize_rcu_expedited() are quite similar, and with small modifications to rcu_blocking_is_gp() can be made identical. This commit therefore makes this change in order to save a few lines of code and to reduce the amount of duplicate code. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h index 7f5cb4228b59..b800bdfe74b3 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h @@ -643,6 +643,33 @@ static void _synchronize_rcu_expedited(void) mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.exp_mutex); } +/* + * During early boot, any blocking grace-period wait automatically + * implies a grace period. Later on, this is never the case for PREEMPT. + * + * Howevr, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPT, any + * blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if + * there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of + * either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited(). It is OK to + * occasionally incorrectly indicate that there are multiple CPUs online + * when there was in fact only one the whole time, as this just adds some + * overhead: RCU still operates correctly. + */ +static int rcu_blocking_is_gp(void) +{ + int ret; + + if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE) + return true; + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT)) + return false; + might_sleep(); /* Check for RCU read-side critical section. */ + preempt_disable(); + ret = num_online_cpus() <= 1; + preempt_enable(); + return ret; +} + #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU /* @@ -729,39 +756,6 @@ static void sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup(int cpu) { } -/** - * synchronize_rcu_expedited - Brute-force RCU grace period - * - * Wait for an RCU-preempt grace period, but expedite it. The basic - * idea is to IPI all non-idle non-nohz online CPUs. The IPI handler - * checks whether the CPU is in an RCU-preempt critical section, and - * if so, it sets a flag that causes the outermost rcu_read_unlock() - * to report the quiescent state. On the other hand, if the CPU is - * not in an RCU read-side critical section, the IPI handler reports - * the quiescent state immediately. - * - * Although this is a greate improvement over previous expedited - * implementations, it is still unfriendly to real-time workloads, so is - * thus not recommended for any sort of common-case code. In fact, if - * you are using synchronize_rcu_expedited() in a loop, please restructure - * your code to batch your updates, and then Use a single synchronize_rcu() - * instead. - * - * This has the same semantics as (but is more brutal than) synchronize_rcu(). - */ -void synchronize_rcu_expedited(void) -{ - RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) || - lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) || - lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map), - "Illegal synchronize_rcu_expedited() in RCU read-side critical section"); - - if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE) - return; - _synchronize_rcu_expedited(); -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu_expedited); - #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU */ /* Invoked on each online non-idle CPU for expedited quiescent state. */ @@ -801,27 +795,28 @@ static void sync_sched_exp_online_cleanup(int cpu) WARN_ON_ONCE(ret); } -/* - * Because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPT, any - * blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if - * there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of - * either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited(). It is OK to - * occasionally incorrectly indicate that there are multiple CPUs online - * when there was in fact only one the whole time, as this just adds some - * overhead: RCU still operates correctly. - */ -static int rcu_blocking_is_gp(void) -{ - int ret; - - might_sleep(); /* Check for RCU read-side critical section. */ - preempt_disable(); - ret = num_online_cpus() <= 1; - preempt_enable(); - return ret; -} +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU */ -/* PREEMPT=n implementation of synchronize_rcu_expedited(). */ +/** + * synchronize_rcu_expedited - Brute-force RCU grace period + * + * Wait for an RCU grace period, but expedite it. The basic idea is to + * IPI all non-idle non-nohz online CPUs. The IPI handler checks whether + * the CPU is in an RCU critical section, and if so, it sets a flag that + * causes the outermost rcu_read_unlock() to report the quiescent state + * for RCU-preempt or asks the scheduler for help for RCU-sched. On the + * other hand, if the CPU is not in an RCU read-side critical section, + * the IPI handler reports the quiescent state immediately. + * + * Although this is a greate improvement over previous expedited + * implementations, it is still unfriendly to real-time workloads, so is + * thus not recommended for any sort of common-case code. In fact, if + * you are using synchronize_rcu_expedited() in a loop, please restructure + * your code to batch your updates, and then Use a single synchronize_rcu() + * instead. + * + * This has the same semantics as (but is more brutal than) synchronize_rcu(). + */ void synchronize_rcu_expedited(void) { RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) || @@ -829,12 +824,10 @@ void synchronize_rcu_expedited(void) lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map), "Illegal synchronize_rcu_expedited() in RCU read-side critical section"); - /* If only one CPU, this is automatically a grace period. */ + /* Is the state is such that the call is a grace period? */ if (rcu_blocking_is_gp()) return; _synchronize_rcu_expedited(); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu_expedited); - -#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU */ -- 2.17.1