linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/7] rcu: Kick adaptive-ticks CPUs that are holding up RCU grace periods

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: <20130413151943.GX29861@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Sat, 13 Apr 2013 08:19:43 -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, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/7] rcu: Kick adaptive-ticks CPUs that are
 holding up RCU grace periods

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:06:58PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/4/13 Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > Adaptive-ticks CPUs inform RCU when they enter kernel mode, but they do
> > not necessarily turn the scheduler-clock tick back on.  This state of
> > affairs could result in RCU waiting on an adaptive-ticks CPU running
> > for an extended period in kernel mode.  Such a CPU will never run the
> > RCU state machine, and could therefore indefinitely extend the RCU state
> > machine, sooner or later resulting in an OOM condition.
> >
> > This patch, inspired by an earlier patch by Frederic Weisbecker, therefore
> > causes RCU's force-quiescent-state processing to check for this condition
> > and to send an IPI to CPUs that remain in that state for too long.
> > "Too long" currently means about three jiffies by default, which is
> > quite some time for a CPU to remain in the kernel without blocking.
> > The rcu_tree.jiffies_till_first_fqs and rcutree.jiffies_till_next_fqs
> > sysfs variables may be used to tune "too long" if needed.
> >
> > Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> It might be better if I take this patch to get it through
> tip:timers/nohz so that I can keep it in sync with the rest. What do
> you think?

Works for me!  Let me know when you have picked it up and I will drop
it from my tree.

							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/