From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: urezki@gmail.com, neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com, frederic@kernel.org,
paulmck@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] rcu/nocb: Fix possible bugs in rcu_barrier()
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2022 18:17:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2aa3311d-936c-8f6d-7f2a-6d67776fda00@joelfernandes.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220918221231.79143-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
On 9/18/2022 6:12 PM, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> When going through the lazy-rcu work, I noticed that
> rcu_barrier_entrain() does not really wake up the rcuog GP thread in any
> path after entraining. This means it is possible the GP thread is not
> awakened soon (say there were no CBs in the cblist after entraining
> time).
>
> Further, nothing appears to be calling the rcu_barrier callback
> directly in the case the ->cblist was empty which means if the IPI gets
> delayed enough to make the ->cblist empty and it turns out to be the last
> CPU holding, then nothing calls completes rcu_state.barrier_completion.
>
> Fix both these issues.
>
> A note on the wakeup, there are 3 cases AFAICS after the call to
> rcu_nocb_flush_bypass():
>
> 1. The rdp->cblist has pending CBs.
>
> 2. The rdp->cblist has all done CBs.
>
> 3. The rdp->cblist has no CBs at all (say the IPI took a long time to
> arrive and some other path dequeued them in the meanwhile).
>
> For #3, entraining a CB is not needed and we should bail. For #1 and
> needed. But for #2 it is needed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> ---
> I only build tested this and wanted to post it in advance for discussions. I
> will test it more soon. Thanks.
>
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 18f07e167d5e..65d439286757 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -3904,10 +3904,11 @@ static void rcu_barrier_callback(struct rcu_head *rhp)
> /*
> * If needed, entrain an rcu_barrier() callback on rdp->cblist.
> */
> -static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> +static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp, unsigned long flags)
> {
> unsigned long gseq = READ_ONCE(rcu_state.barrier_sequence);
> unsigned long lseq = READ_ONCE(rdp->barrier_seq_snap);
> + bool was_alldone;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&rcu_state.barrier_lock);
> if (rcu_seq_state(lseq) || !rcu_seq_state(gseq) || rcu_seq_ctr(lseq) != rcu_seq_ctr(gseq))
> @@ -3916,14 +3917,20 @@ static void rcu_barrier_entrain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> rdp->barrier_head.func = rcu_barrier_callback;
> debug_rcu_head_queue(&rdp->barrier_head);
> rcu_nocb_lock(rdp);
> + was_alldone = !rcu_segcblist_pend_cbs(&rdp->cblist);
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_nocb_flush_bypass(rdp, NULL, jiffies));
> +
> if (rcu_segcblist_entrain(&rdp->cblist, &rdp->barrier_head)) {
> atomic_inc(&rcu_state.barrier_cpu_count);
> + __call_rcu_nocb_wake(rdp, was_alldone, flags); /* unlocks */
I noticed that __call_rcu_nocb_wake() does a restore of the flags, which may not
work for all callers of rcu_nocb_entrain(). Sigh. The patch needs to be fixed
for that, but at least it highlights the potential issues.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-18 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-18 22:12 Joel Fernandes (Google)
2022-09-18 22:17 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2022-09-19 9:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-19 21:00 ` Joel Fernandes
2022-09-21 7:49 ` [rcu/nocb] 79b696b5c3: WARNING:at_kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h:#rcu_barrier_entrain kernel test robot
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=2aa3311d-936c-8f6d-7f2a-6d67776fda00@joelfernandes.org \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.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®