[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110720190141.GJ2313@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:01:41 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ed Tomlinson <edt@....ca>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com, patches@...aro.org,
edward.tomlinson@...o.bombardier.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH rcu/urgent 0/6] Fixes for RCU/scheduler/irq-threads
trainwreck
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 08:52:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 20:44 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > RCU boost is new and counts as strange for another few days at least.
> >
> > I'd rather prefer a oneliner patch that turns it off in the Kconfig
> > for now.
> >
> > We are awfully late in the -rc cycle and this diffstat:
> >
> > b/include/linux/sched.h | 3 ++
> > b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 6 +++--
> > b/kernel/sched.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > b/kernel/signal.c | 19 +++++++++++------
> > b/kernel/softirq.c | 12 +++++++++-
> > kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 6 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> >
> > looks very scary to me.
>
> A lot of that is also relevant to !BOOST.
Unfortunately, agreed. :-(
The expedited grace periods also cause rcu_read_unlock() to call
into the scheduler. This can interact badly with the recently
added RCU read-side critical sections in the scheduler that have
either the runqueue or the priority-inheritance locks held, especially
when interrupts occur towards the end of __rcu_read_unlock(). But
there are some failure cases that don't involve interrupts (though
I believe all of them involve RCU_BOOST).
That said, turning off RCU_BOOST would allow dropping this patches:
7765be2fec0f4 Fix RCU_BOOST race handling current->rcu_read_unlock_special
Thanx, Paul
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists