summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2011-12-11rcu: Apply ACCESS_ONCE() to rcu_boost() return valuePaul E. McKenney1-1/+2
Both TINY_RCU's and TREE_RCU's implementations of rcu_boost() access the ->boost_tasks and ->exp_tasks fields without preventing concurrent changes to these fields. This commit therefore applies ACCESS_ONCE in order to prevent compiler mischief. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11Revert "rcu: Permit rt_mutex_unlock() with irqs disabled"Paul E. McKenney1-5/+0
This reverts commit 5342e269b2b58ee0b0b4168a94087faaa60d0567. The approach taken in this patch was deemed too abusive to mutexes, and thus too likely to result in maintenance problems in the future. Instead, we will disallow RCU read-side critical sections that partially overlap with interrupt-disbled code segments. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Adaptive dyntick-idle preparationPaul E. McKenney1-11/+43
If there are other CPUs active at a given point in time, then there is a limit to what a given CPU can do to advance the current RCU grace period. Beyond this limit, attempting to force the RCU grace period forward will do nothing but consume energy burning CPU cycles. Therefore, this commit takes an adaptive approach to RCU_FAST_NO_HZ preparations for idle. It pushes the RCU core state machine for two cycles unconditionally, and then it will push from zero to three additional cycles, but only as long as the RCU core has work for this CPU to do immediately. The rcu_pending() function is used to check whether the RCU core has such work. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Keep invoking callbacks if CPU otherwise idlePaul E. McKenney1-0/+14
The rcu_do_batch() function that invokes callbacks for TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU normally throttles callback invocation to avoid degrading scheduling latency. However, as long as the CPU would otherwise be idle, there is no downside to continuing to invoke any callbacks that have passed through their grace periods. In fact, processing such callbacks in a timely manner has the benefit of increasing the probability that the CPU can enter the power-saving dyntick-idle mode. Therefore, this commit allows callback invocation to continue beyond the preset limit as long as the scheduler does not have some other task to run and as long as context is that of the idle task or the relevant RCU kthread. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Permit dyntick-idle with callbacks pendingPaul E. McKenney1-4/+71
The current implementation of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ prevents CPUs from entering dyntick-idle state if they have RCU callbacks pending. Unfortunately, this has the side-effect of often preventing them from entering this state, especially if at least one other CPU is not in dyntick-idle state. However, the resulting per-tick wakeup is wasteful in many cases: if the CPU has already fully responded to the current RCU grace period, there will be nothing for it to do until this grace period ends, which will frequently take several jiffies. This commit therefore permits a CPU that has done everything that the current grace period has asked of it (rcu_pending() == 0) even if it still as RCU callbacks pending. However, such a CPU posts a timer to wake it up several jiffies later (6 jiffies, based on experience with grace-period lengths). This wakeup is required to handle situations that can result in all CPUs being in dyntick-idle mode, thus failing to ever complete the current grace period. If a CPU wakes up before the timer goes off, then it cancels that timer, thus avoiding spurious wakeups. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Reduce latency of rcu_prepare_for_idle()Paul E. McKenney1-5/+7
Re-enable interrupts across calls to quiescent-state functions and also across force_quiescent_state() to reduce latency. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Eliminate RCU_FAST_NO_HZ grace-period hangPaul E. McKenney1-76/+2
With the new implementation of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ, it was possible to hang RCU grace periods as follows: o CPU 0 attempts to go idle, cycles several times through the rcu_prepare_for_idle() loop, then goes dyntick-idle when RCU needs nothing more from it, while still having at least on RCU callback pending. o CPU 1 goes idle with no callbacks. Both CPUs can then stay in dyntick-idle mode indefinitely, preventing the RCU grace period from ever completing, possibly hanging the system. This commit therefore prevents CPUs that have RCU callbacks from entering dyntick-idle mode. This approach also eliminates the need for the end-of-grace-period IPIs used previously. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Avoid needlessly IPIing CPUs at GP endPaul E. McKenney1-2/+14
If a CPU enters dyntick-idle mode with callbacks pending, it will need an IPI at the end of the grace period. However, if it exits dyntick-idle mode before the grace period ends, it will be needlessly IPIed at the end of the grace period. Therefore, this commit clears the per-CPU rcu_awake_at_gp_end flag when a CPU determines that it does not need it. This in turn requires disabling interrupts across much of rcu_prepare_for_idle() in order to avoid having nested interrupts clearing this state out from under us. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Go dyntick-idle more quickly if CPU has serviced current grace periodPaul E. McKenney1-6/+18
The earlier version would attempt to push callbacks through five times before going into dyntick-idle mode if callbacks remained, but the CPU had done all that it needed to do for the current RCU grace periods. This is wasteful: In most cases, once the CPU has done all that it needs to for the current RCU grace periods, it will make no further progress on the callbacks no matter how many times it loops through the RCU core processing and the idle-entry code. This commit therefore goes to dyntick-idle mode whenever the current CPU has done all it can for the current grace period. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Add tracing for RCU_FAST_NO_HZPaul E. McKenney1-3/+15
This commit adds trace_rcu_prep_idle(), which is invoked from rcu_prepare_for_idle() and rcu_wake_cpu() to trace attempts on the part of RCU to force CPUs into dyntick-idle mode. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Allow dyntick-idle mode for CPUs with callbacksPaul E. McKenney1-32/+124
Currently, RCU does not permit a CPU to enter dyntick-idle mode if that CPU has any RCU callbacks queued. This means that workloads for which each CPU wakes up and does some RCU updates every few ticks will never enter dyntick-idle mode. This can result in significant unnecessary power consumption, so this patch permits a given to enter dyntick-idle mode if it has callbacks, but only if that same CPU has completed all current work for the RCU core. We determine use rcu_pending() to determine whether a given CPU has completed all current work for the RCU core. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Remove redundant return from rcu_report_exp_rnp()Thomas Gleixner1-1/+0
Empty void functions do not need "return", so this commit removes it from rcu_report_exp_rnp(). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Omit self-awaken when setting up expedited grace periodThomas Gleixner1-5/+11
When setting up an expedited grace period, if there were no readers, the task will awaken itself. This commit removes this useless self-awakening. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-12-11rcu: Make synchronize_sched_expedited() better at work sharingPaul E. McKenney1-1/+1
When synchronize_sched_expedited() takes its second and subsequent snapshots of sync_sched_expedited_started, it subtracts 1. This means that the concurrent caller of synchronize_sched_expedited() that incremented to that value sees our successful completion, it will not be able to take advantage of it. This restriction is pointless, given that our full expedited grace period would have happened after the other guy started, and thus should be able to serve as a proxy for the other guy successfully executing try_stop_cpus(). This commit therefore removes the subtraction of 1. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-12-11rcu: Avoid RCU-preempt expedited grace-period botchPaul E. McKenney1-2/+5
Because rcu_read_unlock_special() samples rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp) after dropping rnp->lock, the following sequence of events is possible: 1. Task A exits its RCU read-side critical section, and removes itself from the ->blkd_tasks list, releases rnp->lock, and is then preempted. Task B remains on the ->blkd_tasks list, and blocks the current expedited grace period. 2. Task B exits from its RCU read-side critical section and removes itself from the ->blkd_tasks list. Because it is the last task blocking the current expedited grace period, it ends that expedited grace period. 3. Task A resumes, and samples rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp) which of course indicates that nothing is blocking the nonexistent expedited grace period. Task A is again preempted. 4. Some other CPU starts an expedited grace period. There are several tasks blocking this expedited grace period queued on the same rcu_node structure that Task A was using in step 1 above. 5. Task A examines its state and incorrectly concludes that it was the last task blocking the expedited grace period on the current rcu_node structure. It therefore reports completion up the rcu_node tree. 6. The expedited grace period can then incorrectly complete before the tasks blocked on this same rcu_node structure exit their RCU read-side critical sections. Arbitrarily bad things happen. This commit therefore takes a snapshot of rcu_preempted_readers_exp(rnp) prior to dropping the lock, so that only the last task thinks that it is the last task, thus avoiding the failure scenario laid out above. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-09-29rcu: Remove rcu_needs_cpu_flush() to avoid false quiescent statesPaul E. McKenney1-25/+0
The purpose of rcu_needs_cpu_flush() was to iterate on pushing the current grace period in order to help the current CPU enter dyntick-idle mode. However, this can result in failures if the CPU starts entering dyntick-idle mode, but then backs out. In this case, the call to rcu_pending() from rcu_needs_cpu_flush() might end up announcing a non-existing quiescent state. This commit therefore removes rcu_needs_cpu_flush() in favor of letting the dyntick-idle machinery at the end of the softirq handler push the loop along via its call to rcu_pending(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Wire up RCU_BOOST_PRIO for rcutreeMike Galbraith1-5/+15
RCU boost threads start life at RCU_BOOST_PRIO, while others remain at RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO. While here, change thread names to match other kthreads, and adjust rcu_yield() to not override the priority set by the user. This last change sets the stage for runtime changes to priority in the -rt tree. Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Permit rt_mutex_unlock() with irqs disabledPaul E. McKenney1-0/+5
Create a separate lockdep class for the rt_mutex used for RCU priority boosting and enable use of rt_mutex_lock() with irqs disabled. This prevents RCU priority boosting from falling prey to deadlocks when someone begins an RCU read-side critical section in preemptible state, but releases it with an irq-disabled lock held. Unfortunately, the scheduler's runqueue and priority-inheritance locks still must either completely enclose or be completely enclosed by any overlapping RCU read-side critical section. This version removes a redundant local_irq_restore() noted by Yong Zhang. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Suppress NMI backtraces when stall ends before dumpPaul E. McKenney1-4/+9
It is possible for an RCU CPU stall to end just as it is detected, in which case the current code will uselessly dump all CPU's stacks. This commit therefore checks for this condition and refrains from sending needless NMIs. And yes, the stall might also end just after we checked all CPUs and tasks, but in that case we would at least have given some clue as to which CPU/task was at fault. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Simplify unboosting checksPaul E. McKenney1-10/+10
Commit 7765be (Fix RCU_BOOST race handling current->rcu_read_unlock_special) introduced a new ->rcu_boosted field in the task structure. This is redundant because the existing ->rcu_boost_mutex will be non-NULL at any time that ->rcu_boosted is nonzero. Therefore, this commit removes ->rcu_boosted and tests ->rcu_boost_mutex instead. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Move __rcu_read_unlock()'s barrier() within if-statementPaul E. McKenney1-1/+1
We only need to constrain the compiler if we are actually exiting the top-level RCU read-side critical section. This commit therefore moves the first barrier() cal in __rcu_read_unlock() to inside the "if" statement, thus avoiding needless register flushes for inner rcu_read_unlock() calls. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Simplify quiescent-state accountingPaul E. McKenney1-3/+3
There is often a delay between the time that a CPU passes through a quiescent state and the time that this quiescent state is reported to the RCU core. It is quite possible that the grace period ended before the quiescent state could be reported, for example, some other CPU might have deduced that this CPU passed through dyntick-idle mode. It is critically important that quiescent state be counted only against the grace period that was in effect at the time that the quiescent state was detected. Previously, this was handled by recording the number of the last grace period to complete when passing through a quiescent state. The RCU core then checks this number against the current value, and rejects the quiescent state if there is a mismatch. However, one additional possibility must be accounted for, namely that the quiescent state was recorded after the prior grace period completed but before the current grace period started. In this case, the RCU core must reject the quiescent state, but the recorded number will match. This is handled when the CPU becomes aware of a new grace period -- at that point, it invalidates any prior quiescent state. This works, but is a bit indirect. The new approach records the current grace period, and the RCU core checks to see (1) that this is still the current grace period and (2) that this grace period has not yet ended. This approach simplifies reasoning about correctness, and this commit changes over to this new approach. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Add grace-period, quiescent-state, and call_rcu trace eventsPaul E. McKenney1-3/+19
Add trace events to record grace-period start and end, quiescent states, CPUs noticing grace-period start and end, grace-period initialization, call_rcu() invocation, tasks blocking in RCU read-side critical sections, tasks exiting those same critical sections, force_quiescent_state() detection of dyntick-idle and offline CPUs, CPUs entering and leaving dyntick-idle mode (except from NMIs), CPUs coming online and going offline, and CPUs being kicked for staying in dyntick-idle mode for too long (as in many weeks, even on 32-bit systems). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> rcu: Add the rcu flavor to callback trace events The earlier trace events for registering RCU callbacks and for invoking them did not include the RCU flavor (rcu_bh, rcu_preempt, or rcu_sched). This commit adds the RCU flavor to those trace events. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Add event-trace markers to TREE_RCU kthreadsPaul E. McKenney1-0/+12
Add event-trace markers to TREE_RCU kthreads to allow including these kthread's CPU time in the utilization calculations. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Update comments to reflect softirqs vs. kthreadsPaul E. McKenney1-1/+2
We now have kthreads only for flavors of RCU that support boosting, so update the now-misleading comments accordingly. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Put names into TINY_RCU structures under RCU_TRACEPaul E. McKenney1-1/+1
In order to allow event tracing to distinguish between flavors of RCU, we need those names in the relevant RCU data structures. TINY_RCU has avoided them for memory-footprint reasons, so add them only if CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Abstract common code for RCU grace-period-wait primitivesPaul E. McKenney1-10/+1
Pull the code that waits for an RCU grace period into a single function, which is then called by synchronize_rcu() and friends in the case of TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, and from rcu_barrier() and friends in the case of TINY_RCU and TINY_PREEMPT_RCU. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Avoid unnecessary self-wakeup of per-CPU kthreadsShaohua Li1-5/+3
There are a number of cases where the RCU can find additional work for the per-CPU kthread within the context of that per-CPU kthread. In such cases, the per-CPU kthread is already running, so attempting to wake itself up does nothing except waste CPU cycles. This commit therefore checks to see if it is in the per-CPU kthread context, omitting the wakeup in this case. Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-09-29rcu: Use kthread_create_on_node()Eric Dumazet1-1/+4
Commit a26ac2455ffc (move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread) added per-CPU kthreads. However, kthread creation uses kthread_create(), which can put the kthread's stack and task struct on the wrong NUMA node. Therefore, use kthread_create_on_node() instead of kthread_create() so that the stacks and task structs are placed on the correct NUMA node. A similar change was carried out in commit 94dcf29a11b3 (kthread: use kthread_create_on_node()). Also change rcutorture's priority-boost-test kthread creation. Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> CC: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-07-20softirq,rcu: Inform RCU of irq_exit() activityPeter Zijlstra1-1/+1
The rcu_read_unlock_special() function relies on in_irq() to exclude scheduler activity from interrupt level. This fails because exit_irq() can invoke the scheduler after clearing the preempt_count() bits that in_irq() uses to determine that it is at interrupt level. This situation can result in failures as follows: $task IRQ SoftIRQ rcu_read_lock() /* do stuff */ <preempt> |= UNLOCK_BLOCKED rcu_read_unlock() --t->rcu_read_lock_nesting irq_enter(); /* do stuff, don't use RCU */ irq_exit(); sub_preempt_count(IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET); invoke_softirq() ttwu(); spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) rcu_read_lock(); /* do stuff */ rcu_read_unlock(); rcu_read_unlock_special() rcu_report_exp_rnp() ttwu() spin_lock_irq(&pi->lock) /* deadlock */ rcu_read_unlock_special(t); Ed can simply trigger this 'easy' because invoke_softirq() immediately does a ttwu() of ksoftirqd/# instead of doing the in-place softirq stuff first, but even without that the above happens. Cure this by also excluding softirqs from the rcu_read_unlock_special() handler and ensuring the force_irqthreads ksoftirqd/# wakeup is done from full softirq context. [ Alternatively, delaying the ->rcu_read_lock_nesting decrement until after the special handling would make the thing more robust in the face of interrupts as well. And there is a separate patch for that. ] Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reported-and-tested-by: Ed Tomlinson <edt@aei.ca> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-07-20rcu: protect __rcu_read_unlock() against scheduler-using irq handlersPaul E. McKenney1-5/+24
The addition of RCU read-side critical sections within runqueue and priority-inheritance lock critical sections introduced some deadlock cycles, for example, involving interrupts from __rcu_read_unlock() where the interrupt handlers call wake_up(). This situation can cause the instance of __rcu_read_unlock() invoked from interrupt to do some of the processing that would otherwise have been carried out by the task-level instance of __rcu_read_unlock(). When the interrupt-level instance of __rcu_read_unlock() is called with a scheduler lock held from interrupt-entry/exit situations where in_irq() returns false, deadlock can result. This commit resolves these deadlocks by using negative values of the per-task ->rcu_read_lock_nesting counter to indicate that an instance of __rcu_read_unlock() is in flight, which in turn prevents instances from interrupt handlers from doing any special processing. This patch is inspired by Steven Rostedt's earlier patch that similarly made __rcu_read_unlock() guard against interrupt-mediated recursion (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/15/326), but this commit refines Steven's approach to avoid the need for preemption disabling on the __rcu_read_unlock() fastpath and to also avoid the need for manipulating a separate per-CPU variable. This patch avoids need for preempt_disable() by instead using negative values of the per-task ->rcu_read_lock_nesting counter. Note that nested rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() pairs are still permitted, but they will never see ->rcu_read_lock_nesting go to zero, and will therefore never invoke rcu_read_unlock_special(), thus preventing them from seeing the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit should it be set in ->rcu_read_unlock_special. This patch also adds a check for ->rcu_read_unlock_special being negative in rcu_check_callbacks(), thus preventing the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS bit from being set should a scheduling-clock interrupt occur while __rcu_read_unlock() is exiting from an outermost RCU read-side critical section. Of course, __rcu_read_unlock() can be preempted during the time that ->rcu_read_lock_nesting is negative. This could result in the setting of the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit after __rcu_read_unlock() checks it, and would also result it this task being queued on the corresponding rcu_node structure's blkd_tasks list. Therefore, some later RCU read-side critical section would enter rcu_read_unlock_special() to clean up -- which could result in deadlock if that critical section happened to be in the scheduler where the runqueue or priority-inheritance locks were held. This situation is dealt with by making rcu_preempt_note_context_switch() check for negative ->rcu_read_lock_nesting, thus refraining from queuing the task (and from setting RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED) if we are already exiting from the outermost RCU read-side critical section (in other words, we really are no longer actually in that RCU read-side critical section). In addition, rcu_preempt_note_context_switch() invokes rcu_read_unlock_special() to carry out the cleanup in this case, which clears out the ->rcu_read_unlock_special bits and dequeues the task (if necessary), in turn avoiding needless delay of the current RCU grace period and needless RCU priority boosting. It is still illegal to call rcu_read_unlock() while holding a scheduler lock if the prior RCU read-side critical section has ever had either preemption or irqs enabled. However, the common use case is legal, namely where then entire RCU read-side critical section executes with irqs disabled, for example, when the scheduler lock is held across the entire lifetime of the RCU read-side critical section. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-07-20rcu: Streamline code produced by __rcu_read_unlock()Paul E. McKenney1-6/+6
Given some common flag combinations, particularly -Os, gcc will inline rcu_read_unlock_special() despite its being in an unlikely() clause. Use noinline to prohibit this misoptimization. In addition, move the second barrier() in __rcu_read_unlock() so that it is not on the common-case code path. This will allow the compiler to generate better code for the common-case path through __rcu_read_unlock(). Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Acked-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
2011-07-20rcu: Fix RCU_BOOST race handling current->rcu_read_unlock_specialPaul E. McKenney1-2/+6
The RCU_BOOST commits for TREE_PREEMPT_RCU introduced an other-task write to a new RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BOOSTED bit in the task_struct structure's ->rcu_read_unlock_special field, but, as noted by Steven Rostedt, without correctly synchronizing all accesses to ->rcu_read_unlock_special. This could result in bits in ->rcu_read_unlock_special being spuriously set and cleared due to conflicting accesses, which in turn could result in deadlocks between the rcu_node structure's ->lock and the scheduler's rq and pi locks. These deadlocks would result from RCU incorrectly believing that the just-ended RCU read-side critical section had been preempted and/or boosted. If that RCU read-side critical section was executed with either rq or pi locks held, RCU's ensuing (incorrect) calls to the scheduler would cause the scheduler to attempt to once again acquire the rq and pi locks, resulting in deadlock. More complex deadlock cycles are also possible, involving multiple rq and pi locks as well as locks from multiple rcu_node structures. This commit fixes synchronization by creating ->rcu_boosted field in task_struct that is accessed and modified only when holding the ->lock in the rcu_node structure on which the task is queued (on that rcu_node structure's ->blkd_tasks list). This results in tasks accessing only their own current->rcu_read_unlock_special fields, making unsynchronized access once again legal, and keeping the rcu_read_unlock() fastpath free of atomic instructions and memory barriers. The reason that the rcu_read_unlock() fastpath does not need to access the new current->rcu_boosted field is that this new field cannot be non-zero unless the RCU_READ_UNLOCK_BLOCKED bit is set in the current->rcu_read_unlock_special field. Therefore, rcu_read_unlock() need only test current->rcu_read_unlock_special: if that is zero, then current->rcu_boosted must also be zero. This bug does not affect TINY_PREEMPT_RCU because this implementation of RCU accesses current->rcu_read_unlock_special with irqs disabled, thus preventing races on the !SMP systems that TINY_PREEMPT_RCU runs on. Maybe-reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> Maybe-reported-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
2011-07-20rcu: decrease rcu_report_exp_rnp coupling with schedulerPaul E. McKenney1-2/+4
PREEMPT_RCU read-side critical sections blocking an expedited grace period invoke rcu_report_exp_rnp(). When the last such critical section has completed, rcu_report_exp_rnp() invokes the scheduler to wake up the task that invoked synchronize_rcu_expedited() -- needlessly holding the root rcu_node structure's lock while doing so, thus needlessly providing a way for RCU and the scheduler to deadlock. This commit therefore releases the root rcu_node structure's lock before calling wake_up(). Reported-by: Ed Tomlinson <edt@aei.ca> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-07-13rcu: Prevent RCU callbacks from executing before scheduler initializedPaul E. McKenney1-4/+11
Under some rare but real combinations of configuration parameters, RCU callbacks are posted during early boot that use kernel facilities that are not yet initialized. Therefore, when these callbacks are invoked, hard hangs and crashes ensue. This commit therefore prevents RCU callbacks from being invoked until after the scheduler is fully up and running, as in after multiple tasks have been spawned. It might well turn out that a better approach is to identify the specific RCU callbacks that are causing this problem, but that discussion will wait until such time as someone really needs an RCU callback to be invoked (as opposed to merely registered) during early boot. Reported-by: julie Sullivan <kernelmail.jms@gmail.com> Reported-by: RKK <kulkarni.ravi4@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Tested-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Tested-by: julie Sullivan <kernelmail.jms@gmail.com> Tested-by: RKK <kulkarni.ravi4@gmail.com>
2011-06-17rcu: Move RCU_BOOST #ifdefs to header filePaul E. McKenney1-0/+384
The commit "use softirq instead of kthreads except when RCU_BOOST=y" just applied #ifdef in place. This commit is a cleanup that moves the newly #ifdef'ed code to the header file kernel/rcutree_plugin.h. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-06-16rcu: use softirq instead of kthreads except when RCU_BOOST=yPaul E. McKenney1-15/+26
This patch #ifdefs RCU kthreads out of the kernel unless RCU_BOOST=y, thus eliminating context-switch overhead if RCU priority boosting has not been configured. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-06-15rcu: Use softirq to address performance regressionShaohua Li1-0/+9
Commit a26ac2455ffcf3(rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread) introduced performance regression. In an AIM7 test, this commit degraded performance by about 40%. The commit runs rcu callbacks in a kthread instead of softirq. We observed high rate of context switch which is caused by this. Out test system has 64 CPUs and HZ is 1000, so we saw more than 64k context switch per second which is caused by RCU's per-CPU kthread. A trace showed that most of the time the RCU per-CPU kthread doesn't actually handle any callbacks, but instead just does a very small amount of work handling grace periods. This means that RCU's per-CPU kthreads are making the scheduler do quite a bit of work in order to allow a very small amount of RCU-related processing to be done. Alex Shi's analysis determined that this slowdown is due to lock contention within the scheduler. Unfortunately, as Peter Zijlstra points out, the scheduler's real-time semantics require global action, which means that this contention is inherent in real-time scheduling. (Yes, perhaps someone will come up with a workaround -- otherwise, -rt is not going to do well on large SMP systems -- but this patch will work around this issue in the meantime. And "the meantime" might well be forever.) This patch therefore re-introduces softirq processing to RCU, but only for core RCU work. RCU callbacks are still executed in kthread context, so that only a small amount of RCU work runs in softirq context in the common case. This should minimize ksoftirqd execution, allowing us to skip boosting of ksoftirqd for CONFIG_RCU_BOOST=y kernels. Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> Tested-by: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-06-15rcu: Simplify curing of load woesPaul E. McKenney1-10/+1
Make the functions creating the kthreads wake them up. Leverage the fact that the per-node and boost kthreads can run anywhere, thus dispensing with the need to wake them up once the incoming CPU has gone fully online. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Tested-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>
2011-05-31rcu: Cure load woesPeter Zijlstra1-1/+10
Commit cc3ce5176d83 (rcu: Start RCU kthreads in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state) fudges a sleeping task' state, resulting in the scheduler seeing a TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE task going to sleep, but a TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE task waking up. The result is unbalanced load calculation. The problem that patch tried to address is that the RCU threads could stay in UNINTERRUPTIBLE state for quite a while and triggering the hung task detector due to on-demand wake-ups. Cure the problem differently by always giving the tasks at least one wake-up once the CPU is fully up and running, this will kick them out of the initial UNINTERRUPTIBLE state and into the regular INTERRUPTIBLE wait state. [ The alternative would be teaching kthread_create() to start threads as INTERRUPTIBLE but that needs a tad more thought. ] Reported-by: Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@free.fr> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1306755291.1200.2872.camel@twins Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2011-05-28rcu: Start RCU kthreads in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE statePaul E. McKenney1-0/+1
Upon creation, kthreads are in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state, which can result in softlockup warnings. Because some of RCU's kthreads can legitimately be idle indefinitely, start them in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state in order to avoid those warnings. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Tested-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2011-05-28rcu: Remove waitqueue usage for cpu, node, and boost kthreadsPeter Zijlstra1-15/+1
It is not necessary to use waitqueues for the RCU kthreads because we always know exactly which thread is to be awakened. In addition, wake_up() only issues an actual wakeup when there is a thread waiting on the queue, which was why there was an extra explicit wake_up_process() to get the RCU kthreads started. Eliminating the waitqueues (and wake_up()) in favor of wake_up_process() eliminates the need for the initial wake_up_process() and also shrinks the data structure size a bit. The wakeup logic is placed in a new rcu_wait() macro. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2011-05-26rcu: Decrease memory-barrier usage based on semi-formal proofPaul E. McKenney1-4/+3
(Note: this was reverted, and is now being re-applied in pieces, with this being the fifth and final piece. See below for the reason that it is now felt to be safe to re-apply this.) Commit d09b62d fixed grace-period synchronization, but left some smp_mb() invocations in rcu_process_callbacks() that are no longer needed, but sheer paranoia prevented them from being removed. This commit removes them and provides a proof of correctness in their absence. It also adds a memory barrier to rcu_report_qs_rsp() immediately before the update to rsp->completed in order to handle the theoretical possibility that the compiler or CPU might move massive quantities of code into a lock-based critical section. This also proves that the sheer paranoia was not entirely unjustified, at least from a theoretical point of view. In addition, the old dyntick-idle synchronization depended on the fact that grace periods were many milliseconds in duration, so that it could be assumed that no dyntick-idle CPU could reorder a memory reference across an entire grace period. Unfortunately for this design, the addition of expedited grace periods breaks this assumption, which has the unfortunate side-effect of requiring atomic operations in the functions that track dyntick-idle state for RCU. (There is some hope that the algorithms used in user-level RCU might be applied here, but some work is required to handle the NMIs that user-space applications can happily ignore. For the short term, better safe than sorry.) This proof assumes that neither compiler nor CPU will allow a lock acquisition and release to be reordered, as doing so can result in deadlock. The proof is as follows: 1. A given CPU declares a quiescent state under the protection of its leaf rcu_node's lock. 2. If there is more than one level of rcu_node hierarchy, the last CPU to declare a quiescent state will also acquire the ->lock of the next rcu_node up in the hierarchy, but only after releasing the lower level's lock. The acquisition of this lock clearly cannot occur prior to the acquisition of the leaf node's lock. 3. Step 2 repeats until we reach the root rcu_node structure. Please note again that only one lock is held at a time through this process. The acquisition of the root rcu_node's ->lock must occur after the release of that of the leaf rcu_node. 4. At this point, we set the ->completed field in the rcu_state structure in rcu_report_qs_rsp(). However, if the rcu_node hierarchy contains only one rcu_node, then in theory the code preceding the quiescent state could leak into the critical section. We therefore precede the update of ->completed with a memory barrier. All CPUs will therefore agree that any updates preceding any report of a quiescent state will have happened before the update of ->completed. 5. Regardless of whether a new grace period is needed, rcu_start_gp() will propagate the new value of ->completed to all of the leaf rcu_node structures, under the protection of each rcu_node's ->lock. If a new grace period is needed immediately, this propagation will occur in the same critical section that ->completed was set in, but courtesy of the memory barrier in #4 above, is still seen to follow any pre-quiescent-state activity. 6. When a given CPU invokes __rcu_process_gp_end(), it becomes aware of the end of the old grace period and therefore makes any RCU callbacks that were waiting on that grace period eligible for invocation. If this CPU is the same one that detected the end of the grace period, and if there is but a single rcu_node in the hierarchy, we will still be in the single critical section. In this case, the memory barrier in step #4 guarantees that all callbacks will be seen to execute after each CPU's quiescent state. On the other hand, if this is a different CPU, it will acquire the leaf rcu_node's ->lock, and will again be serialized after each CPU's quiescent state for the old grace period. On the strength of this proof, this commit therefore removes the memory barriers from rcu_process_callbacks() and adds one to rcu_report_qs_rsp(). The effect is to reduce the number of memory barriers by one and to reduce the frequency of execution from about once per scheduling tick per CPU to once per grace period. This was reverted do to hangs found during testing by Yinghai Lu and Ingo Molnar. Frederic Weisbecker supplied Yinghai with tracing that located the underlying problem, and Frederic also provided the fix. The underlying problem was that the HARDIRQ_ENTER() macro from lib/locking-selftest.c invoked irq_enter(), which in turn invokes rcu_irq_enter(), but HARDIRQ_EXIT() invoked __irq_exit(), which does not invoke rcu_irq_exit(). This situation resulted in calls to rcu_irq_enter() that were not balanced by the required calls to rcu_irq_exit(). Therefore, after these locking selftests completed, RCU's dyntick-idle nesting count was a large number (for example, 72), which caused RCU to to conclude that the affected CPU was not in dyntick-idle mode when in fact it was. RCU would therefore incorrectly wait for this dyntick-idle CPU, resulting in hangs. In contrast, with Frederic's patch, which replaces the irq_enter() in HARDIRQ_ENTER() with an __irq_enter(), these tests don't ever call either rcu_irq_enter() or rcu_irq_exit(), which works because the CPU running the test is already marked as not being in dyntick-idle mode. This means that the rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit() calls and RCU then has no problem working out which CPUs are in dyntick-idle mode and which are not. The reason that the imbalance was not noticed before the barrier patch was applied is that the old implementation of rcu_enter_nohz() ignored the nesting depth. This could still result in delays, but much shorter ones. Whenever there was a delay, RCU would IPI the CPU with the unbalanced nesting level, which would eventually result in rcu_enter_nohz() being called, which in turn would force RCU to see that the CPU was in dyntick-idle mode. The reason that very few people noticed the problem is that the mismatched irq_enter() vs. __irq_exit() occured only when the kernel was built with CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-05-20Revert "rcu: Decrease memory-barrier usage based on semi-formal proof"Paul E. McKenney1-3/+4
This reverts commit e59fb3120becfb36b22ddb8bd27d065d3cdca499. This reversion was due to (extreme) boot-time slowdowns on SPARC seen by Yinghai Lu and on x86 by Ingo . This is a non-trivial reversion due to intervening commits. Conflicts: Documentation/RCU/trace.txt kernel/rcutree.c Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2011-05-08rcu: permit rcu_read_unlock() to be called while holding runqueue locksPaul E. McKenney1-44/+20
Avoid calling into the scheduler while holding core RCU locks. This allows rcu_read_unlock() to be called while holding the runqueue locks, but only as long as there was no chance of the RCU read-side critical section having been preempted. (Otherwise, if RCU priority boosting is enabled, rcu_read_unlock() might call into the scheduler in order to unboost itself, which might allows self-deadlock on the runqueue locks within the scheduler.) Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-05-06rcu: fix spellingPaul E. McKenney1-31/+31
The "preemptible" spelling is preferable. May as well fix it. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-05-06rcu: call __rcu_read_unlock() in exit_rcu for tree RCULai Jiangshan1-1/+1
Using __rcu_read_lock() in place of rcu_read_lock() leaves any debug state as it really should be, namely with the lock still held. Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-05-06rcu: fix tracing bug thinko on boost-balk attributionPaul E. McKenney1-1/+1
The rcu_initiate_boost_trace() function mis-attributed refusals to initiate RCU priority boosting that were in fact due to its not yet being time to boost. This patch fixes the faulty comparison. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2011-05-06rcu: add tracing for RCU's kthread run states.Paul E. McKenney1-0/+3
Add tracing to help debugging situations when RCU's kthreads are not running but are supposed to be. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
2011-05-06rcu: Add boosting to TREE_PREEMPT_RCU tracingPaul E. McKenney1-4/+38
Includes total number of tasks boosted, number boosted on behalf of each of normal and expedited grace periods, and statistics on attempts to initiate boosting that failed for various reasons. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>