[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20231219044247.1708-1-hdanton@sina.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 12:42:47 +0800
From: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@....com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] rcu: Defer RCU kthreads wakeup when CPU is dying
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 00:19:15 +0100 Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> +static void swake_up_one_online(struct swait_queue_head *wqh)
> +{
> + int cpu = get_cpu();
> +
> + /*
> + * If called from rcutree_report_cpu_starting(), wake up
> + * is dangerous that late in the CPU-down hotplug process. The
> + * scheduler might queue an ignored hrtimer. Defer the wake up
> + * to an online CPU instead.
> + */
But why is scheduler having any interest selecting a dying CPU for
adding a hrtimer on at the first place?
> + if (unlikely(cpu_is_offline(cpu))) {
> + int target;
> +
> + target = cpumask_any_and(housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_RCU),
> + cpu_online_mask);
> +
> + smp_call_function_single(target, swake_up_one_online_ipi,
> + wqh, 0);
> + put_cpu();
> + } else {
> + put_cpu();
> + swake_up_one(wqh);
> + }
> +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists