[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YN7cJZOZzjYJFClR@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 11:28:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, Minchan Kim <minchan@...gle.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
YT Chang <yt.chang@...iatek.com>,
Wenju Xu (许文举) <wenju.xu@...iatek.com>,
Jonathan JMChen (陳家明)
<jonathan.jmchen@...iatek.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
SH Chen <show-hong.chen@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] psi: stop relying on timer_pending for poll_work
rescheduling
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 09:28:04AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 9:12 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 09:09:25AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 1:59 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 01:51:51PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > > + /* cmpxchg should be called even when !force to set poll_scheduled */
> > > > > + if (atomic_cmpxchg(&group->poll_scheduled, 0, 1) && !force)
> > > > > return;
> > > >
> > > > Why is that a cmpxchg() ?
> > >
> > > We want to set poll_scheduled and proceed with rescheduling the timer
> > > unless it's already scheduled, so cmpxchg helps us to make that
> > > decision atomically. Or did I misunderstand your question?
> >
> > What's wrong with: atomic_xchg(&group->poll_scheduled, 1) ?
>
> Yes, since poll_scheduled can be only 0 or 1 atomic_xchg should work
> fine here. Functionally equivalent but I assume atomic_xchg() is more
> efficient due to no comparison.
Mostly conceptually simpler; the cmpxchg-on-0 makes that you have to
check if there's ever any state outside of {0,1}. The xchg() thing is
the classical test-and-set pattern.
On top of all that, the cmpxchg() can fail, which brings ordering
issues.
Typically, I think, you want to ensure that everything that happens
before psi_schedule_poll_work() is visible to the work when it runs
(also see Johannes' email). In case poll_scheduled is already 1, the
cmpxchg will fail and *NOT* provide that ordering. Meaning the work
might not observe the latest changes. xchg() doesn't have this subtlety.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists