[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20191210040154.2498-2-paulmck@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 20:01:46 -0800
From: paulmck@...nel.org
To: rcu@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.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,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/10] rcu: Avoid modifying mask_ofl_ipi in sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus()
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
The "mask_ofl_ipi" is used to track which CPUs get IPIed, however
in the IPI sending loop, "mask_ofl_ipi" along with another variable
"mask_ofl_test" might also get modified to record which CPUs' quiesent
states must be reported by the sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus() at
the end of sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(). This overlap of roles
can be confusing, so this patch cleans things a little by using
"mask_ofl_ipi" solely for determining which CPUs must be IPIed and
"mask_ofl_test" for solely determining on behalf of which CPUs
sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus() must report a quiscent state.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Acked-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index 69c5aa6..6a6f328 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -387,10 +387,10 @@ static void sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(struct work_struct *wp)
}
ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu, rcu_exp_handler, NULL, 0);
put_cpu();
- if (!ret) {
- mask_ofl_ipi &= ~mask;
+ /* The CPU will report the QS in response to the IPI. */
+ if (!ret)
continue;
- }
+
/* Failed, raced with CPU hotplug operation. */
raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
if ((rnp->qsmaskinitnext & mask) &&
@@ -401,13 +401,12 @@ static void sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(struct work_struct *wp)
schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
goto retry_ipi;
}
- /* CPU really is offline, so we can ignore it. */
- if (!(rnp->expmask & mask))
- mask_ofl_ipi &= ~mask;
+ /* CPU really is offline, so we must report its QS. */
+ if (rnp->expmask & mask)
+ mask_ofl_test |= mask;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
}
/* Report quiescent states for those that went offline. */
- mask_ofl_test |= mask_ofl_ipi;
if (mask_ofl_test)
rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult(rnp, mask_ofl_test, false);
}
--
2.9.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists