mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com, frederic@kernel.org, joelagnelf@nvidia.com,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, srikar@linux.ibm.com, sshegde@linux.ibm.com,
	urezki@gmail.com, samir@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] cpuhp: Expedite RCU when toggling system-wide SMT mode
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2026 14:45:57 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f54ab277-cd9f-4d09-86ba-ea74a9648547@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260507053928.2975867-2-vishalc@linux.ibm.com>

Hi All,

Gentle ping.
Should I send another version with the tags?

Thanks,
vishalc

On 07/05/26 11:09, Vishal Chourasia wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> SMT mode switch operation on a large CPU count system takes close to an
> hour to complete. Initial debugging root caused the delay to the CPU
> hotplug subsystem being blocked on numerous synchronize_rcu() calls.
> Simply enabling system-wide RCU expediting reduced the switch time to
> 5-6 minutes. Since then, different approaches have been explored, of
> which some had their own side effects and others didn't work as
> expected.
>
> Approaches explored:
>
> 1. Expedited individual CPU hotplug operations by wrapping
> _cpu_up()/_cpu_down() with rcu_expedite_gp()/rcu_unexpedite_gp() [0].
> Peter suggested expediting only when SMT switch is triggered via the
> sysfs control interface, not for individual hotplug operations [1].
>
> 2. Replacing synchronize_rcu() calls in the CPU hotplug codepath with
> their expedited variants. This is not viable because one
> synchronize_rcu() is invoked inside cpus_write_lock(), which is shared
> with other kernel subsystems [5].
>
> 3. Hoisting cpus_write_lock() to be taken once for the entire SMT switch
> operation instead of per-CPU [3][4]. On large systems where the SMT
> switch can still take 5-6 minutes, holding the lock for that duration
> causes hung task splats and starves other subsystems depending on the
> read lock.
>
> 4. Peter has also suggested using rcu_sync_{enter|exit}() which as is
> doesn't help as is, but can be paired the approach 2 from above.
>
> Current approach: expedite RCU grace periods around the SMT switch
> operation in the sysfs control interface path, per Peter's suggestion
> [1], with Aboorva's analysis confirming synchronize_rcu() as the
> bottleneck [2].
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260218083915.660252-2-vishalc@linux.ibm.com
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260113090153.GS830755@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/5f2ab8a44d685701fe36cdaa8042a1aef215d10d.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260119114333.GI1890602@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ba470918-0ad9-4548-9161-826948462f73@linux.ibm.com/
> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/804E7B47-F515-4592-B12E-84AD251EB07D@nvidia.com/
> [6] https://lore.kernel.org/all/e2cca734-9191-4073-ba9d-936014498645@linux.ibm.com/
>
> Vishal Chourasia (1):
>    cpuhp: Expedite RCU when toggling system-wide SMT mode
>
>   include/linux/rcupdate.h | 8 ++++++++
>   kernel/cpu.c             | 4 ++++
>   kernel/rcu/rcu.h         | 4 ----
>   3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-08  9:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-07  5:39 Vishal Chourasia
2026-05-07  5:39 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] " Vishal Chourasia
2026-05-07 19:07   ` Samir M
2026-05-12  6:32   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-06-08  9:15 ` Vishal Chourasia [this message]

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=f54ab277-cd9f-4d09-86ba-ea74a9648547@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=vishalc@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=samir@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=srikar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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

Powered by JetHome