[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150507124938.GA17675@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 14:49:39 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: fweisbec@...hat.com, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, williams@...hat.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable
& enable from context tracking on syscall entry
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> The TIF_RCU_QS thing is just a fancy way for synchronize_rcu()
> (being executed on some other CPU not doing RT work) to
> intelligently wait for the remote (RT work doing) CPU to finish
> executing kernel code, without polling or so.
it's basically a cheap IPI being inserted on the remote CPU.
We need the TIF_RCU_QS callback not just to wait intelligently, but
mainly to elapse a grace period, otherwise synchronize_rcu() might not
ever make progress: think a SCHED_FIFO task doing some kernel work,
synchronize_rcu() stumbling upon it - but the SCHED_FIFO task
otherwise never scheduling and never getting any timer irqs either,
and thus never entering quiescent state.
(Cc:-ed Paul too, he might be interested in this as well.)
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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