From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Requirements to control kernel isolation/nohz_full at runtime
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 13:47:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200904204740.GP29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200901104640.GA13814@lenoir>
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 12:46:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working on making nohz_full/nohz_idle runtime toggable
> and some other people seem to be interested as well. So I've dumped
> a few thoughts about some pre-requirements to achieve that for those
> interested.
>
> As you can see, there is a bit of hard work in the way. I'm iterating
> that in https://pad.kernel.org/p/isolation, feel free to edit:
>
>
> == RCU nocb ==
>
> Currently controllable with "rcu_nocbs=" boot parameter and/or through nohz_full=/isolcpus=nohz
> We need to make it toggeable at runtime. Currently handling that:
> v1: https://lwn.net/Articles/820544/
> v2: coming soon
Looking forward to seeing it!
> == TIF_NOHZ ==
>
> Need to get rid of that in order not to trigger syscall slowpath on CPUs that don't want nohz_full.
> Also we don't want to iterate all threads and clear the flag when the last nohz_full CPU exits nohz_full
> mode. Prefer static keys to call context tracking on archs. x86 does that well.
Would it help if RCU was able to, on a per-CPU basis, distinguish between
nohz_full userspace execution on the one hand and idle-loop execution
on the other? Or do you have some other trick in mind?
Thanx, Paul
> == Proper entry code ==
>
> We must make sure that a given arch never calls exception_enter() / exception_exit().
> This saves the previous state of context tracking and switch to kernel mode (from context tracking POV)
> temporarily. Since this state is saved on the stack, this prevents us from turning off context tracking
> entirely on a CPU: The tracking must be done on all CPUs and that takes some cycles.
>
> This means that, considering early entry code (before the call to context tracking upon kernel entry,
> and after the call to context tracking upon kernel exit), we must take care of few things:
>
> 1) Make sure early entry code can't trigger exceptions. Or if it does, the given exception can't schedule
> or use RCU (unless it calls rcu_nmi_enter()). Otherwise the exception must call exception_enter()/exception_exit()
> which we don't want.
>
> 2) No call to schedule_user().
>
> 3) Make sure early entry code is not interruptible or preempt_schedule_irq() would rely on
> exception_entry()/exception_exit()
>
> 4) Make sure early entry code can't be traced (no call to preempt_schedule_notrace()), or if it does it
> can't schedule
>
> I believe x86 does most of that well. In the end we should remove exception_enter()/exit implementations
> in x86 and replace it with a check that makes sure context_tracking state is not in USER. An arch meeting
> all the above conditions would earn a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SANE_CONTEXT_TRACKING. Being able to toggle nohz_full
> at runtime would depend on that.
>
>
> == Cputime accounting ==
>
> Both write and read side must switch to tick based accounting and drop the use of seqlock in task_cputime(),
> task_gtime(), kcpustat_field(), kcpustat_cpu_fetch(). Special ordering/state machine is required to make that without races.
>
> == Nohz ==
>
> Switch from nohz_full to nohz_idle. Mind a few details:
>
> 1) Turn off 1Hz offlined tick handled in housekeeping
> 2) Handle tick dependencies, take care of racing CPUs setting/clearing tick dependency. It's much trickier when
> we switch from nohz_idle to nohz_full
>
> == Unbound affinity ==
>
> Restore kernel threads, workqueue, timers, etc... wide affinity. But take care of cpumasks that have been set through other
> interfaces: sysfs, procfs, etc...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-04 20:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-01 10:46 Frederic Weisbecker
2020-09-03 18:23 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-09-03 18:30 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-09-03 18:36 ` Phil Auld
2020-09-03 18:52 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-09-09 22:38 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-09-09 22:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-09-04 20:47 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2020-09-09 22:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-09-07 15:34 ` peterz
2020-09-09 23:02 ` 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=20200904204740.GP29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®