linux-kernel - [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/2] rcu: demote SRCU_SYNCHRONIZE

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]

Message-Id: <1294945477-10612-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:04:36 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	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, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/2] rcu: demote SRCU_SYNCHRONIZE_DELAY from kernel-parameter status

Because the adaptive synchronize_srcu_expedited() approach has
worked very well in testing, remove the kernel parameter and
replace it by a C-preprocessor macro.  If someone finds problems
with this approach, a more complex and aggressively adaptive
approach might be required.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 init/Kconfig  |   15 ---------------
 kernel/srcu.c |   15 +++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
index 526ec1c..e11bc79 100644
--- a/init/Kconfig
+++ b/init/Kconfig
@@ -497,21 +497,6 @@ config RCU_BOOST_DELAY
 
 	  Accept the default if unsure.
 
-config SRCU_SYNCHRONIZE_DELAY
-	int "Microseconds to delay before waiting for readers"
-	range 0 20
-	default 10
-	help
-	  This option controls how long SRCU delays before entering its
-	  loop waiting on SRCU readers.  The purpose of this loop is
-	  to avoid the unconditional context-switch penalty that would
-	  otherwise be incurred if there was an active SRCU reader,
-	  in a manner similar to adaptive locking schemes.  This should
-	  be set to be a bit longer than the common-case SRCU read-side
-	  critical-section overhead.
-
-	  Accept the default if unsure.
-
 endmenu # "RCU Subsystem"
 
 config IKCONFIG
diff --git a/kernel/srcu.c b/kernel/srcu.c
index 98d8c1e..73ce23f 100644
--- a/kernel/srcu.c
+++ b/kernel/srcu.c
@@ -156,6 +156,16 @@ void __srcu_read_unlock(struct srcu_struct *sp, int idx)
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__srcu_read_unlock);
 
 /*
+ * We use an adaptive strategy for synchronize_srcu() and especially for
+ * synchronize_srcu_expedited().  We spin for a fixed time period
+ * (defined below) to allow SRCU readers to exit their read-side critical
+ * sections.  If there are still some readers after 10 microseconds,
+ * we repeatedly block for 1-millisecond time periods.  This approach
+ * has done well in testing, so there is no need for a config parameter.
+ */
+#define SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY 10
+
+/*
  * Helper function for synchronize_srcu() and synchronize_srcu_expedited().
  */
 static void __synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, void (*sync_func)(void))
@@ -207,11 +217,12 @@ static void __synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, void (*sync_func)(void))
 	 * will have finished executing.  We initially give readers
 	 * an arbitrarily chosen 10 microseconds to get out of their
 	 * SRCU read-side critical sections, then loop waiting 1/HZ
-	 * seconds per iteration.
+	 * seconds per iteration.  The 10-microsecond value has done
+	 * very well in testing.
 	 */
 
 	if (srcu_readers_active_idx(sp, idx))
-		udelay(CONFIG_SRCU_SYNCHRONIZE_DELAY);
+		udelay(SYNCHRONIZE_SRCU_READER_DELAY);
 	while (srcu_readers_active_idx(sp, idx))
 		schedule_timeout_interruptible(1);
 
-- 
1.7.3.2

--
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/