[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240530134552.5467-9-frederic@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 15:45:49 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@....com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>,
rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 08/11] rcu/nocb: Remove halfway (de-)offloading handling from rcu_core
RCU core can't be running anymore while in the middle of (de-)offloading
since this sort of transition now only applies to offline CPUs.
The locked callback acceleration handling during the transition can
therefore be removed, along with concurrent batch execution.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 26 ++++----------------------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index c502a38dc5f3..4f1863a0536d 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -2776,24 +2776,6 @@ static __latent_entropy void rcu_core(void)
unsigned long flags;
struct rcu_data *rdp = raw_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode;
- /*
- * On RT rcu_core() can be preempted when IRQs aren't disabled.
- * Therefore this function can race with concurrent NOCB (de-)offloading
- * on this CPU and the below condition must be considered volatile.
- * However if we race with:
- *
- * _ Offloading: In the worst case we accelerate or process callbacks
- * concurrently with NOCB kthreads. We are guaranteed to
- * call rcu_nocb_lock() if that happens.
- *
- * _ Deoffloading: In the worst case we miss callbacks acceleration or
- * processing. This is fine because the early stage
- * of deoffloading invokes rcu_core() after setting
- * SEGCBLIST_RCU_CORE. So we guarantee that we'll process
- * what could have been dismissed without the need to wait
- * for the next rcu_pending() check in the next jiffy.
- */
- const bool do_batch = !rcu_segcblist_completely_offloaded(&rdp->cblist);
if (cpu_is_offline(smp_processor_id()))
return;
@@ -2813,17 +2795,17 @@ static __latent_entropy void rcu_core(void)
/* No grace period and unregistered callbacks? */
if (!rcu_gp_in_progress() &&
- rcu_segcblist_is_enabled(&rdp->cblist) && do_batch) {
- rcu_nocb_lock_irqsave(rdp, flags);
+ rcu_segcblist_is_enabled(&rdp->cblist) && !rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
+ local_irq_save(flags);
if (!rcu_segcblist_restempty(&rdp->cblist, RCU_NEXT_READY_TAIL))
rcu_accelerate_cbs_unlocked(rnp, rdp);
- rcu_nocb_unlock_irqrestore(rdp, flags);
+ local_irq_restore(flags);
}
rcu_check_gp_start_stall(rnp, rdp, rcu_jiffies_till_stall_check());
/* If there are callbacks ready, invoke them. */
- if (do_batch && rcu_segcblist_ready_cbs(&rdp->cblist) &&
+ if (!rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp) && rcu_segcblist_ready_cbs(&rdp->cblist) &&
likely(READ_ONCE(rcu_scheduler_fully_active))) {
rcu_do_batch(rdp);
/* Re-invoke RCU core processing if there are callbacks remaining. */
--
2.45.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists