From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
patches@linaro.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3 RFC paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: flip only once for every grace period
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:29:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F44B580.6040003@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120221172442.GG2375@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>From 4ddf62aaf2c4ebe6b9d4a1c596e8b43a678f1f0d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:12:02 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 3/3 RFC paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: flip only once for every grace period
flip_idx_and_wait() is not changed, and is split as two functions
and only a short comments is added for smp_mb() E.
__synchronize_srcu() use a different algorithm for "leak" readers.
detail is in the comments of the patch.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
kernel/srcu.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
1 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/srcu.c b/kernel/srcu.c
index a51ac48..346f9d7 100644
--- a/kernel/srcu.c
+++ b/kernel/srcu.c
@@ -249,6 +249,37 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__srcu_read_unlock);
*/
#define SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY 5
+static void wait_idx(struct srcu_struct *sp, int idx, bool expedited)
+{
+ int trycount = 0;
+
+ /*
+ * SRCU read-side critical sections are normally short, so wait
+ * a small amount of time before possibly blocking.
+ */
+ if (!srcu_readers_active_idx_check(sp, idx)) {
+ udelay(SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY);
+ while (!srcu_readers_active_idx_check(sp, idx)) {
+ if (expedited && ++ trycount < 10)
+ udelay(SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY);
+ else
+ schedule_timeout_interruptible(1);
+ }
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * The following smp_mb() E pairs with srcu_read_unlock()'s
+ * smp_mb C to ensure that if srcu_readers_active_idx_check()
+ * sees srcu_read_unlock()'s counter decrement, then any
+ * of the current task's subsequent code will happen after
+ * that SRCU read-side critical section.
+ *
+ * It also ensures the order between the above waiting and
+ * the next flipping.
+ */
+ smp_mb(); /* E */
+}
+
/*
* Flip the readers' index by incrementing ->completed, then wait
* until there are no more readers using the counters referenced by
@@ -258,12 +289,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__srcu_read_unlock);
* Of course, it is possible that a reader might be delayed for the
* full duration of flip_idx_and_wait() between fetching the
* index and incrementing its counter. This possibility is handled
- * by __synchronize_srcu() invoking flip_idx_and_wait() twice.
+ * by the next __synchronize_srcu() invoking wait_idx() for such readers
+ * before start a new grace perioad.
*/
static void flip_idx_and_wait(struct srcu_struct *sp, bool expedited)
{
int idx;
- int trycount = 0;
idx = sp->completed++ & 0x1;
@@ -278,28 +309,7 @@ static void flip_idx_and_wait(struct srcu_struct *sp, bool expedited)
*/
smp_mb(); /* D */
- /*
- * SRCU read-side critical sections are normally short, so wait
- * a small amount of time before possibly blocking.
- */
- if (!srcu_readers_active_idx_check(sp, idx)) {
- udelay(SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY);
- while (!srcu_readers_active_idx_check(sp, idx)) {
- if (expedited && ++ trycount < 10)
- udelay(SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY);
- else
- schedule_timeout_interruptible(1);
- }
- }
-
- /*
- * The following smp_mb() E pairs with srcu_read_unlock()'s
- * smp_mb C to ensure that if srcu_readers_active_idx_check()
- * sees srcu_read_unlock()'s counter decrement, then any
- * of the current task's subsequent code will happen after
- * that SRCU read-side critical section.
- */
- smp_mb(); /* E */
+ wait_idx(sp, idx, expedited);
}
/*
@@ -307,8 +317,6 @@ static void flip_idx_and_wait(struct srcu_struct *sp, bool expedited)
*/
static void __synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, bool expedited)
{
- int idx = 0;
-
rcu_lockdep_assert(!lock_is_held(&sp->dep_map) &&
!lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) &&
!lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) &&
@@ -318,27 +326,42 @@ static void __synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, bool expedited)
mutex_lock(&sp->mutex);
/*
- * If there were no helpers, then we need to do two flips of
- * the index. The first flip is required if there are any
- * outstanding SRCU readers even if there are no new readers
- * running concurrently with the first counter flip.
- *
- * The second flip is required when a new reader picks up
+ * When in the previous grace perioad, if a reader picks up
* the old value of the index, but does not increment its
* counter until after its counters is summed/rechecked by
- * srcu_readers_active_idx_check(). In this case, the current SRCU
+ * srcu_readers_active_idx_check(). In this case, the previous SRCU
* grace period would be OK because the SRCU read-side critical
- * section started after this SRCU grace period started, so the
+ * section started after the SRCU grace period started, so the
* grace period is not required to wait for the reader.
*
- * However, the next SRCU grace period would be waiting for the
- * other set of counters to go to zero, and therefore would not
- * wait for the reader, which would be very bad. To avoid this
- * bad scenario, we flip and wait twice, clearing out both sets
- * of counters.
+ * However, such leftover readers affect this new SRCU grace period.
+ * So we have to wait for such readers. This wait_idx() should be
+ * considerred as the wait_idx() in the flip_idx_and_wait() of
+ * the previous grace perioad except that it is for leftover readers
+ * started before this synchronize_srcu(). So when it returns,
+ * there is no leftover readers that starts before this grace period.
+ *
+ * If there are some leftover readers that do not increment its
+ * counter until after its counters is summed/rechecked by
+ * srcu_readers_active_idx_check(), In this case, this SRCU
+ * grace period would be OK as above comments says. We defines
+ * such readers as leftover-leftover readers, we consider these
+ * readers fteched index of (sp->completed + 1), it means they
+ * are considerred as exactly the same as the readers after this
+ * grace period.
+ *
+ * wait_idx() is expected very fast, because leftover readers
+ * are unlikely produced.
*/
- for (; idx < 2; idx++)
- flip_idx_and_wait(sp, expedited);
+ wait_idx(sp, (sp->completed - 1) & 0x1, expedited);
+
+ /*
+ * Starts a new grace period, this flip is required if there are
+ * any outstanding SRCU readers even if there are no new readers
+ * running concurrently with the counter flip.
+ */
+ flip_idx_and_wait(sp, expedited);
+
mutex_unlock(&sp->mutex);
}
--
1.7.4.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-22 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-13 2:09 [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu] rcu: direct algorithmic SRCU implementation Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-15 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-16 6:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-16 10:50 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-16 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-16 11:14 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-15 14:31 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-15 14:51 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-16 6:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-16 11:00 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-16 11:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-16 12:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-16 12:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-16 14:52 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-02-16 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-16 15:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-20 7:15 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-20 17:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-21 1:11 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-21 1:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-21 8:44 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-21 17:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-22 9:29 ` [PATCH 1/3 RFC paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: Remove fast check path Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-22 9:29 ` [PATCH 2/3 RFC paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: only increase the upper bit for srcu_read_lock() Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-22 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-22 21:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-22 21:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-22 21:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-02-23 1:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-22 9:29 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2012-02-23 1:01 ` [PATCH 3/3 RFC paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: flip only once for every grace period Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-24 8:06 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-24 20:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-27 8:01 ` [PATCH 1/2 RFC] srcu: change the comments of the wait algorithm Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-27 8:01 ` [PATCH 2/2 RFC] srcu: implement Peter's checking algorithm Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-27 18:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-28 1:51 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-28 13:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-29 10:07 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-02-29 13:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-01 2:31 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-01 13:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-10 3:41 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 8:42 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6 paul/rcu/srcu] srcu: implement call_srcu() Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [PATCH 1/6] remove unused srcu_barrier() Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [PATCH 2/6] Don't touch the snap in srcu_readers_active() Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-08 19:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [PATCH 3/6] use "int trycount" instead of "bool expedited" Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-08 19:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [PATCH 4/6] remove flip_idx_and_wait() Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 10:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-07 3:54 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5 single-thread-version] implement per-domain single-thread state machine call_srcu() Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-08 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-08 14:17 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-08 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-08 20:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-10 3:16 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-12 18:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-14 7:47 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-04-10 20:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] implement per-cpu&per-domain " Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 10:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-08 19:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 15:17 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 15:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-08 19:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-10 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-12 17:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 11:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 15:12 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 15:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-08 19:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-10 3:32 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-10 10:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-12 17:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-12 17:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-12 18:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-12 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-12 23:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-12 23:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-12 23:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-06 15:26 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 15:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 11:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 11:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 11:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 11:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 14:50 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 11:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 14:44 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 15:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-06 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-03-07 6:44 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-07 8:10 ` Gilad Ben-Yossef
2012-03-07 9:21 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 14:47 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-06 9:57 ` [PATCH 6/6] add srcu torture test Lai Jiangshan
2012-03-08 19:03 ` [PATCH 1/6] remove unused srcu_barrier() Paul E. McKenney
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=4F44B580.6040003@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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
Powered by JetHome