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  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:	Sun, 10 Aug 2014 20:28:28 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 1/9] rcu: Add call_rcu_tasks()

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 06:46:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 10:12:54AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Steven covered this earlier in this thread.  One addition might be "For
> > > the same reason that event tracing provides the _rcuidle suffix."
> > 
> > I really don't think its worth the cost.
> 
> Entirely untested, but something like the below shrinks the
> amount of code called under rcu_idle.

If this can be shrunk far enough on enough architectures, I would be
happy to drop the idle-wakeup stuff.

> Also, why are trace_cpu_idle*() not inside rcu_idle_{enter,exit}() ?
> Doesn't seem to make sense to duplicate all that.

There was some rumor about some architecture having portions of the
idle-exit path implemented using hardware assist.  No idea if there
was any truth to that rumor, but if there is, that might constrain
where rcu_idle_{enter,exit}() go.  Other than that, it was just a
desire to avoid touching arch-specific code, which is only a desire
rather than any sort of hard requirement.

> Also, the .cpu argument to trace_cpu_idle() seems silly, how is that
> _ever_ going to be any other cpu than the current?

Beat me.

> Also, the below removes all trace_.*_rcuidle() usage.

If doing that works, that could be good!

							Thanx, Paul

> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/process.c |  2 --
>  kernel/sched/idle.c       | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> index f804dc935d2a..9fc3fc123887 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> @@ -307,9 +307,7 @@ void arch_cpu_idle(void)
>   */
>  void default_idle(void)
>  {
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(1, smp_processor_id());
>  	safe_halt();
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
>  }
>  #ifdef CONFIG_APM_MODULE
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(default_idle);
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index 9f1608f99819..591c08b0e66a 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -44,13 +44,13 @@ __setup("hlt", cpu_idle_nopoll_setup);
>  
>  static inline int cpu_idle_poll(void)
>  {
> +	trace_cpu_idle(0, smp_processor_id());
>  	rcu_idle_enter();
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(0, smp_processor_id());
>  	local_irq_enable();
>  	while (!tif_need_resched())
>  		cpu_relax();
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
>  	rcu_idle_exit();
> +	trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  
> @@ -97,13 +97,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  	stop_critical_timings();
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Tell the RCU framework we are entering an idle section,
> -	 * so no more rcu read side critical sections and one more
> -	 * step to the grace period
> -	 */
> -	rcu_idle_enter();
> -
> -	/*
>  	 * Ask the cpuidle framework to choose a convenient idle state.
>  	 * Fall back to the default arch idle method on errors.
>  	 */
> @@ -114,10 +107,15 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  		 * We can't use the cpuidle framework, let's use the default
>  		 * idle routine.
>  		 */
> -		if (current_clr_polling_and_test())
> +		if (current_clr_polling_and_test()) {
>  			local_irq_enable();
> -		else
> +		} else {
> +			trace_cpu_idle(0, smp_processor_id());
> +			rcu_idle_enter();
>  			arch_cpu_idle();
> +			rcu_idle_exit();
> +			trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id());
> +		}
>  
>  		goto exit_idle;
>  	}
> @@ -147,7 +145,14 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  	    clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_ENTER, &dev->cpu))
>  		goto use_default;
>  
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(next_state, dev->cpu);
> +	trace_cpu_idle(next_state, dev->cpu);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Tell the RCU framework we are entering an idle section,
> +	 * so no more rcu read side critical sections and one more
> +	 * step to the grace period
> +	 */
> +	rcu_idle_enter();
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Enter the idle state previously returned by the governor decision.
> @@ -156,7 +161,9 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  	 */
>  	entered_state = cpuidle_enter(drv, dev, next_state);
>  
> -	trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu);
> +	rcu_idle_exit();
> +
> +	trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu);
>  
>  	if (broadcast)
>  		clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_EXIT, &dev->cpu);
> @@ -175,7 +182,6 @@ static void cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(irqs_disabled()))
>  		local_irq_enable();
>  
> -	rcu_idle_exit();
>  	start_critical_timings();
>  }
>  


--
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