linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC nohz_full v2 6/7] nohz_full: Add full-system-idle state machine

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 1 Jul 2013 11:17:00 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
	niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	darren@...art.com, sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC nohz_full v2 6/7] nohz_full: Add full-system-idle
 state machine

On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 06:53:57PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:10:21PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Check to see if the system is fully idle, other than the timekeeping CPU.
> > + * The caller must have disabled interrupts.
> > + */
> > +bool rcu_sys_is_idle(void)
> > +{
> > +	static struct rcu_sysidle_head rsh;
> > +	int rss = ACCESS_ONCE(full_sysidle_state);
> > +
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(smp_processor_id() != tick_do_timer_cpu);
> > +
> > +	/* Handle small-system case by doing a full scan of CPUs. */
> > +	if (nr_cpu_ids <= RCU_SYSIDLE_SMALL && rss < RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL) {
> > +		int cpu;
> > +		bool isidle = true;
> > +		unsigned long maxj = jiffies - ULONG_MAX / 4;
> > +		struct rcu_data *rdp;
> > +
> > +		/* Scan all the CPUs looking for nonidle CPUs. */
> > +		for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > +			rdp = per_cpu_ptr(rcu_sysidle_state->rda, cpu);
> > +			rcu_sysidle_check_cpu(rdp, &isidle, &maxj);
> > +			if (!isidle)
> > +				break;
> > +		}
> > +		rcu_sysidle_report(rcu_sysidle_state, isidle, maxj);
> 
> To clarify my worries, I would expect the following ordering:
> 
>     CPU 0                                           CPU 1
> 
>     cmpxchg(global_state, RCU_SYSIDLE_..., ...)     write rdtp(1)->idle_dynticks
>     smp_mb() // implied by cmpxchg                  smp_mb()
>     read rdtp(1)-idle_dynticks                      cmpxchg(global_state, RCU_SYSIDLE_NONE)
> 
> This example doesn't really make sense because CPU 0 only wants to change global state after
> checking rdtp(1)->idle_dynticks. So we obviously want the other way around as you did. But then
> I can't find an ordering that makes sure that only either happens:
> 
> * CPU 0 sees CPU 1 update when it wakes up and so we reset to RCU_SYSIDLE_NONE from CPU 0
> * CPU 1 wakes up and reset to RCU_SYSIDLE_NONE and sends an IPI to CPU 0
> 
> I mean that's what the code does, but I don't get the ordering that guarantees we can't
> fall into some intermediate state when CPU 0 sees CPU 1 idle whereas it already woke up without
> sending the IPI.
> 
> I'm sure you'll point me to my mistaken review :)

Not at all -- as noted in previous email, you have helped me understand
why my original design included an RCU_SYSIDLE_LONG state.

								Thanx, Paul

> > +		rss = ACCESS_ONCE(full_sysidle_state);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/* If this is the first observation of an idle period, record it. */
> > +	if (rss == RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL) {
> > +		rss = cmpxchg(&full_sysidle_state,
> > +			      RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL, RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL_NOTED);
> > +		return rss == RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	smp_mb(); /* ensure rss load happens before later caller actions. */
> > +
> > +	/* If already fully idle, tell the caller (in case of races). */
> > +	if (rss == RCU_SYSIDLE_FULL_NOTED)
> > +		return true;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * If we aren't there yet, and a grace period is not in flight,
> > +	 * initiate a grace period.  Either way, tell the caller that
> > +	 * we are not there yet.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (nr_cpu_ids > RCU_SYSIDLE_SMALL &&
> > +	    !rcu_gp_in_progress(rcu_sysidle_state) &&
> > +	    !rsh.inuse && xchg(&rsh.inuse, 1) == 0)
> > +		call_rcu(&rsh.rh, rcu_sysidle_cb);
> > +	return false;
> >  }
> >  
> >  /*
> > @@ -2494,6 +2734,21 @@ static void rcu_sysidle_exit(struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp, int irq)
> >  {
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void rcu_sysidle_check_cpu(struct rcu_data *rdp, bool *isidle,
> > +				  unsigned long *maxj)
> > +{
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool is_sysidle_rcu_state(struct rcu_state *rsp)
> > +{
> > +	return false;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void rcu_sysidle_report(struct rcu_state *rsp, int isidle,
> > +			       unsigned long maxj)
> > +{
> > +}
> > +
> >  static void rcu_sysidle_init_percpu_data(struct rcu_dynticks *rdtp)
> >  {
> >  }
> > -- 
> > 1.8.1.5
> > 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/