linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/15] rcu: Use rcu_gp_kthread

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:	Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:26:32 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
	bobby.prani@...il.com,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/15] rcu: Use rcu_gp_kthread_wake() to wake up grace period kthreads

From: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>

The rcu_gp_kthread_wake() function checks for three conditions before
waking up grace period kthreads:

*  Is the thread we are trying to wake up the current thread?
*  Are the gp_flags zero? (all threads wait on non-zero gp_flags condition)
*  Is there no thread created for this flavour, hence nothing to wake up?

If any one of these condition is true, we do not call wake_up().
It was found that there are quite a few avoidable wake ups both during
idle time and under stress induced by rcutorture.

Idle:

Total:66000, unnecessary:66000, case1:61827, case2:66000, case3:0
Total:68000, unnecessary:68000, case1:63696, case2:68000, case3:0

rcutorture:

Total:254000, unnecessary:254000, case1:199913, case2:254000, case3:0
Total:256000, unnecessary:256000, case1:201784, case2:256000, case3:0

Here case{1-3} are the cases listed above. We can avoid these wake
ups by using rcu_gp_kthread_wake() to conditionally wake up the grace
period kthreads.

There is a comment about an implied barrier supplied by the wake_up()
logic.  This barrier is necessary for the awakened thread to see the
updated ->gp_flags.  This flag is always being updated with the root node
lock held. Also, the awakened thread tries to acquire the root node lock
before reading ->gp_flags because of which there is proper ordering.

Hence this commit tries to avoid calling wake_up() whenever we can by
using rcu_gp_kthread_wake() function.

Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
CC: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index dd6c8b519691..9e83cd9a32f1 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -1938,7 +1938,7 @@ static void rcu_report_qs_rsp(struct rcu_state *rsp, unsigned long flags)
 {
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_gp_in_progress(rsp));
 	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rcu_get_root(rsp)->lock, flags);
-	wake_up(&rsp->gp_wq);  /* Memory barrier implied by wake_up() path. */
+	rcu_gp_kthread_wake(rsp);
 }

 /*
@@ -2516,7 +2516,7 @@ static void force_quiescent_state(struct rcu_state *rsp)
 	ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) =
 		ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) | RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS;
 	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp_old->lock, flags);
-	wake_up(&rsp->gp_wq);  /* Memory barrier implied by wake_up() path. */
+	rcu_gp_kthread_wake(rsp);
 }

 /*
-- 
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/