[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YTZO1eZLpL-Rth_55n_iKJv3xthJdy1vpYRmj+=MfZHFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 18:19:55 +0000
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH rcu 12/16] percpu-refcount: Use call_rcu_hurry() for
atomic switch
Hi Tejun,
Could you give your ACK for this patch, for percpu refcount? The API
is renamed like in the workqueue one, as well.
Thanks a lot,
- Joel
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 6:13 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
>
> Earlier commits in this series allow battery-powered systems to build
> their kernels with the default-disabled CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=y Kconfig option.
> This Kconfig option causes call_rcu() to delay its callbacks in order to
> batch callbacks. This means that a given RCU grace period covers more
> callbacks, thus reducing the number of grace periods, in turn reducing
> the amount of energy consumed, which increases battery lifetime which
> can be a very good thing. This is not a subtle effect: In some important
> use cases, the battery lifetime is increased by more than 10%.
>
> This CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=y option is available only for CPUs that offload
> callbacks, for example, CPUs mentioned in the rcu_nocbs kernel boot
> parameter passed to kernels built with CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y.
>
> Delaying callbacks is normally not a problem because most callbacks do
> nothing but free memory. If the system is short on memory, a shrinker
> will kick all currently queued lazy callbacks out of their laziness,
> thus freeing their memory in short order. Similarly, the rcu_barrier()
> function, which blocks until all currently queued callbacks are invoked,
> will also kick lazy callbacks, thus enabling rcu_barrier() to complete
> in a timely manner.
>
> However, there are some cases where laziness is not a good option.
> For example, synchronize_rcu() invokes call_rcu(), and blocks until
> the newly queued callback is invoked. It would not be a good for
> synchronize_rcu() to block for ten seconds, even on an idle system.
> Therefore, synchronize_rcu() invokes call_rcu_hurry() instead of
> call_rcu(). The arrival of a non-lazy call_rcu_hurry() callback on a
> given CPU kicks any lazy callbacks that might be already queued on that
> CPU. After all, if there is going to be a grace period, all callbacks
> might as well get full benefit from it.
>
> Yes, this could be done the other way around by creating a
> call_rcu_lazy(), but earlier experience with this approach and
> feedback at the 2022 Linux Plumbers Conference shifted the approach
> to call_rcu() being lazy with call_rcu_hurry() for the few places
> where laziness is inappropriate.
>
> And another call_rcu() instance that cannot be lazy is the one on the
> percpu refcounter's "per-CPU to atomic switch" code path, which
> uses RCU when switching to atomic mode. The enqueued callback
> wakes up waiters waiting in the percpu_ref_switch_waitq. Allowing
> this callback to be lazy would result in unacceptable slowdowns for
> users of per-CPU refcounts, such as blk_pre_runtime_suspend().
>
> Therefore, make __percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic() use call_rcu_hurry()
> in order to revert to the old behavior.
>
> [ paulmck: Apply s/call_rcu_flush/call_rcu_hurry/ feedback from Tejun Heo. ]
>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
> Cc: <linux-mm@...ck.org>
> ---
> lib/percpu-refcount.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/percpu-refcount.c b/lib/percpu-refcount.c
> index e5c5315da2741..668f6aa6a75de 100644
> --- a/lib/percpu-refcount.c
> +++ b/lib/percpu-refcount.c
> @@ -230,7 +230,8 @@ static void __percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic(struct percpu_ref *ref,
> percpu_ref_noop_confirm_switch;
>
> percpu_ref_get(ref); /* put after confirmation */
> - call_rcu(&ref->data->rcu, percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu);
> + call_rcu_hurry(&ref->data->rcu,
> + percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu);
> }
>
> static void __percpu_ref_switch_to_percpu(struct percpu_ref *ref)
> --
> 2.31.1.189.g2e36527f23
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists