[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87663566-ed67-fee8-4598-13591f2f072b@joelfernandes.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 22:31:56 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: rushikesh.s.kadam@...el.com, urezki@...il.com,
neeraj.iitr10@...il.com, frederic@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 resend 0/6] Implement call_rcu_lazy() and miscellaneous
fixes
On 8/10/2022 10:23 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
>
> On 8/8/2022 11:45 PM, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
>> Just a refresh of v3 with one additional debug patch. v3's cover letter is here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220713213237.1596225-1-joel@joelfernandes.org/
>>
>> I just started working on this again while I have some time during paternity
>> leave ;-) So I thought I'll just send it out again. No other changes other
>> than that 1 debug patch I added on the top.
>>
>> Next I am going to go refine the power results as mentioned in Paul's comments
>> on the last cover letter.
>
> Side note: Here is another big selling point for call_rcu_lazy().
> Instead of _lazy(), if you just increased jiffies_till_first_fqs, and
> slowed *all* call_rcu() down to achieve the same effect, that would
> affect percpu refcounters switching to atomic-mode, for example.
>
> They switch to atomic mode by calling __percpu_ref_switch_mode() which
> is called by percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync().>
> This will slow this call down for the full lazy duration which will slow
> down suspend in blk_pre_runtime_suspend().
Correction while I am going on the record (got to be careful these
days). It *might* slow down RCU for the full lazy duration, unless of
course a fly-by rescue call_rcu() comes in.
- Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists