[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZCSvKOJqhejuW09u@lothringen>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 23:35:36 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] rcu/nocb: Make shrinker to iterate only NOCB CPUs
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 01:58:06PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 06:02:03PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Callbacks can only be queued as lazy on NOCB CPUs, therefore iterating
> > over the NOCB mask is enough for both counting and scanning. Just lock
> > the mostly uncontended barrier mutex on counting as well in order to
> > keep rcu_nocb_mask stable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
>
> Looks plausible. ;-)
>
> What are you doing to test this? For that matter, what should rcutorture
> be doing to test this? My guess is that the current callback flooding in
> rcu_torture_fwd_prog_cr() should do the trick, but figured I should ask.
All I did was to trigger these shrinker callbacks through debugfs
(https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/mm/shrinker_debugfs.html)
But rcutorture isn't testing it because:
- No torture config has CONFIG_RCU_LAZY
- rcutorture doesn't do any lazy call_rcu() (always calls hurry for the
main RCU flavour).
And I suspect rcutorture isn't ready for accepting the lazy delay, that would
require some special treatment.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists