[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1531984833.12620.16.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:20:33 +0200
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, mhillenb@...zon.de,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Make need_resched() return true when rcu_urgent_qs
requested
On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 08:45 +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
> > My thought would be something like this:
> >
> > if (context_tracking_cpu_is_enabled())
> > rcu_kvm_enter();
> > else
> > rcu_virt_note_context_switch(smp_processor_id());
>
> In the past we needed that (when we introduced that). At least with every
> host interrupt we called this making an rcu event at least every HZ.
> Will the changes in need_resched make this part unnecessary?
Yes, the change in need_resched() should make this part unnecessary.
Unless your architecture's version of the vcpu_run() loop just loops
forever even when TIF_NEED_RESCHED is set? :)
I'm not sure about the context tracking condition in the code snippet
cited above, though. I think that's what caused my problem in the first
place — I have CONTEXT_TRACKING_FORCE && !NO_HZ_FULL. So in 4.15, that
means rcu_user_enter() did nothing and rcu_virt_note_context_switch()
wasn't called. Hence the observed stalls.
Should rcu_user_enter() itself be conditional on CONTEXT_TRACKING not
NO_HZ_FULL?
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5213 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists