[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200520221531.GW2869@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 15:15:31 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
Jason Chen CJ <jason.cj.chen@...el.com>,
Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V6 12/37] x86/entry: Provide
idtentry_entry/exit_cond_rcu()
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 09:49:18PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> writes:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 09:51:17AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> Paul, the major change here is that if an IRQ hits normal kernel code
> >> (i.e. code where RCU is watching and we're not in an EQS), the IRQ
> >> won't call rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit(). Instead it will call
> >> rcu_tickle() on entry and nothing on exit. Does that cover all the
> >> bases?
> >
> > From an RCU viewpoint, yes, give or take my concerns about someone
> > putting rcu_tickle() on entry and rcu_irq_exit() on exit. Perhaps
> > I can bring some lockdep trickery to bear.
>
> An surplus rcu_irq_exit() should already trigger alarms today.
Fair point!
> > But I must defer to Thomas and Peter on the non-RCU/non-NO_HZ_FULL
> > portions of this.
>
> I don't see a problem. Let me write that into actual testable patch
> form.
Here is the RCU part, with my current best guess for the commit log.
Please note that this is on top of my -rcu stack, so some adjustment
will likely be needed to pull it underneath Joel's series that removes
the special-purpose bits at the bottom of the ->dynticks counter.
But a starting point, anyway.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit ca05838a9a1809fafee63f488a7be8b30e1c2a6a
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Date: Wed May 20 15:03:07 2020 -0700
rcu: Abstract out tickle_nohz_for_rcu() from rcu_nmi_enter()
This commit splits out the nohz_full scheduler-tick enabling from the
rest of the rcu_nmi_enter() logic. This allows short exception handlers
that interrupt kernel code regions that RCU is already watching to just
invoke tickle_nohz_for_rcu() at exception entry instead of having to
invoke rcu_nmi_enter() on entry and also rcu_nmi_exit() on all exit paths.
Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
diff --git a/include/linux/hardirq.h b/include/linux/hardirq.h
index 621556e..d4be42a 100644
--- a/include/linux/hardirq.h
+++ b/include/linux/hardirq.h
@@ -14,6 +14,10 @@ extern bool synchronize_hardirq(unsigned int irq);
#if defined(CONFIG_TINY_RCU)
+static inline void tickle_nohz_for_rcu(void)
+{
+}
+
static inline void rcu_nmi_enter(void)
{
}
@@ -23,6 +27,7 @@ static inline void rcu_nmi_exit(void)
}
#else
+extern void tickle_nohz_for_rcu(void);
extern void rcu_nmi_enter(void);
extern void rcu_nmi_exit(void);
#endif
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 7812574..0a3cad4 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -806,6 +806,67 @@ void noinstr rcu_user_exit(void)
#endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL */
/**
+ * tickle_nohz_for_rcu - Enable scheduler tick on CPU if RCU needs it.
+ *
+ * The scheduler tick is not normally enabled when CPUs enter the kernel
+ * from nohz_full userspace execution. After all, nohz_full userspace
+ * execution is an RCU quiescent state and the time executing in the kernel
+ * is quite short. Except of course when it isn't. And it is not hard to
+ * cause a large system to spend tens of seconds or even minutes looping
+ * in the kernel, which can cause a number of problems, include RCU CPU
+ * stall warnings.
+ *
+ * Therefore, if a nohz_full CPU fails to report a quiescent state
+ * in a timely manner, the RCU grace-period kthread sets that CPU's
+ * ->rcu_urgent_qs flag with the expectation that the next interrupt or
+ * exception will invoke this function, which will turn on the scheduler
+ * tick, which will enable RCU to detect that CPU's quiescent states,
+ * for example, due to cond_resched() calls in CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernels.
+ * The tick will be disabled once a quiescent state is reported for
+ * this CPU.
+ *
+ * Of course, in carefully tuned systems, there might never be an
+ * interrupt or exception. In that case, the RCU grace-period kthread
+ * will eventually cause one to happen. However, in less carefully
+ * controlled environments, this function allows RCU to get what it
+ * needs without creating otherwise useless interruptions.
+ */
+noinstr void tickle_nohz_for_rcu(void)
+{
+ struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
+
+ if (in_nmi())
+ return; // Enabling tick is unsafe in NMI handlers.
+ RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(),
+ "Illegal tickle_nohz_for_rcu from extended quiescent state");
+ instrumentation_begin();
+ if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu) ||
+ !READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_urgent_qs) ||
+ READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_forced_tick)) {
+ // RCU doesn't need nohz_full help from this CPU, or it is
+ // already getting that help.
+ instrumentation_end();
+ return;
+ }
+
+ // We get here only when not in an extended quiescent state and
+ // from interrupts (as opposed to NMIs). Therefore, (1) RCU is
+ // already watching and (2) The fact that we are in an interrupt
+ // handler and that the rcu_node lock is an irq-disabled lock
+ // prevents self-deadlock. So we can safely recheck under the lock.
+ // Note that the nohz_full state currently cannot change.
+ raw_spin_lock_rcu_node(rdp->mynode);
+ if (rdp->rcu_urgent_qs && !rdp->rcu_forced_tick) {
+ // A nohz_full CPU is in the kernel and RCU needs a
+ // quiescent state. Turn on the tick!
+ WRITE_ONCE(rdp->rcu_forced_tick, true);
+ tick_dep_set_cpu(rdp->cpu, TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU);
+ }
+ raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rdp->mynode);
+ instrumentation_end();
+}
+
+/**
* rcu_nmi_enter - inform RCU of entry to NMI context
* @irq: Is this call from rcu_irq_enter?
*
@@ -835,7 +896,9 @@ noinstr void rcu_nmi_enter(void)
* is if the interrupt arrived in kernel mode; in this case we would
* be the outermost interrupt but still increment by 2 which is Ok.
*/
- if (rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs()) {
+ if (!rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs()) {
+ tickle_nohz_for_rcu();
+ } else {
if (!in_nmi())
rcu_dynticks_task_exit();
@@ -851,28 +914,6 @@ noinstr void rcu_nmi_enter(void)
}
incby = 1;
- } else if (!in_nmi()) {
- instrumentation_begin();
- if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(rdp->cpu) &&
- READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_urgent_qs) &&
- !READ_ONCE(rdp->rcu_forced_tick)) {
- // We get here only if we had already exited the
- // extended quiescent state and this was an
- // interrupt (not an NMI). Therefore, (1) RCU is
- // already watching and (2) The fact that we are in
- // an interrupt handler and that the rcu_node lock
- // is an irq-disabled lock prevents self-deadlock.
- // So we can safely recheck under the lock.
- raw_spin_lock_rcu_node(rdp->mynode);
- if (rdp->rcu_urgent_qs && !rdp->rcu_forced_tick) {
- // A nohz_full CPU is in the kernel and RCU
- // needs a quiescent state. Turn on the tick!
- WRITE_ONCE(rdp->rcu_forced_tick, true);
- tick_dep_set_cpu(rdp->cpu, TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU);
- }
- raw_spin_unlock_rcu_node(rdp->mynode);
- }
- instrumentation_end();
}
instrumentation_begin();
trace_rcu_dyntick(incby == 1 ? TPS("End") : TPS("StillNonIdle"),
Powered by blists - more mailing lists