[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240816045608.30564-4-neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:26:00 +0530
From: neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org
To: rcu@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
paulmck@...nel.org,
neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org,
neeraj.upadhyay@....com,
boqun.feng@...il.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org,
urezki@...il.com,
frederic@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH rcu 03/11] rcu/nocb: Assert no callbacks while nocb kthread allocation fails
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
When a NOCB CPU fails to create a nocb kthread on bringup, the CPU is
then deoffloaded. The barrier mutex is locked at this stage. It is
typically used to protect against concurrent (de-)offloading and/or
concurrent rcu_barrier() that would otherwise risk a nocb locking
imbalance. However:
* rcu_barrier() can't run concurrently if it's the boot CPU on early
boot-up.
* rcu_barrier() can run concurrently if it's a secondary CPU but it is
expected to see 0 callbacks on this target because it's the first
time it boots.
* (de-)offloading can't happen concurrently with smp_init(), as
rcutorture is initialized later, at least not before device_initcall(),
and userspace isn't available yet.
* (de-)offloading can't happen concurrently with cpu_up(), courtesy of
cpu_hotplug_lock.
But:
* The lazy shrinker might run concurrently with cpu_up(). It shouldn't
try to grab the nocb_lock and risk an imbalance due to lazy_len
supposed to be 0 but be extra cautious.
* Also be cautious against resume from hibernation potential subtleties.
So keep the locking and add some assertions and comments.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h | 14 +++++++++++---
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
index f4112fc663a7..fdd0616f2fd1 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_nocb.h
@@ -1442,7 +1442,7 @@ static void rcu_spawn_cpu_nocb_kthread(int cpu)
"rcuog/%d", rdp_gp->cpu);
if (WARN_ONCE(IS_ERR(t), "%s: Could not start rcuo GP kthread, OOM is now expected behavior\n", __func__)) {
mutex_unlock(&rdp_gp->nocb_gp_kthread_mutex);
- goto end;
+ goto err;
}
WRITE_ONCE(rdp_gp->nocb_gp_kthread, t);
if (kthread_prio)
@@ -1454,7 +1454,7 @@ static void rcu_spawn_cpu_nocb_kthread(int cpu)
t = kthread_create(rcu_nocb_cb_kthread, rdp,
"rcuo%c/%d", rcu_state.abbr, cpu);
if (WARN_ONCE(IS_ERR(t), "%s: Could not start rcuo CB kthread, OOM is now expected behavior\n", __func__))
- goto end;
+ goto err;
if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp))
wake_up_process(t);
@@ -1467,7 +1467,15 @@ static void rcu_spawn_cpu_nocb_kthread(int cpu)
WRITE_ONCE(rdp->nocb_cb_kthread, t);
WRITE_ONCE(rdp->nocb_gp_kthread, rdp_gp->nocb_gp_kthread);
return;
-end:
+
+err:
+ /*
+ * No need to protect against concurrent rcu_barrier()
+ * because the number of callbacks should be 0 for a non-boot CPU,
+ * therefore rcu_barrier() shouldn't even try to grab the nocb_lock.
+ * But hold barrier_mutex to avoid nocb_lock imbalance from shrinker.
+ */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(system_state > SYSTEM_BOOTING && rcu_segcblist_n_cbs(&rdp->cblist));
mutex_lock(&rcu_state.barrier_mutex);
if (rcu_rdp_is_offloaded(rdp)) {
rcu_nocb_rdp_deoffload(rdp);
--
2.40.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists