Message-ID: <8005c35a-d8dc-4908-93e5-46bd206f0139@paulmck-laptop>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2025 21:16:25 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dave@...blig.org>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
	Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@...hat.com>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckwolber@...il.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...a.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Follow-up on Linux-kernel code accessibility

On Sun, Dec 28, 2025 at 01:48:37AM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@...nel.org) wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 28, 2025 at 12:32:50AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Sat, 27 Dec 2025, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sat, Dec 27, 2025 at 07:16:28AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 26 Dec 2025, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2025 at 02:22:17PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2025 at 11:48:30AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > > > > > Agreed, but knowing what the function is doing should give you some idea of
> > > > > > > > how it is doing it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >   "Loop doing repeated quiescent-state forcing until the grace period ends."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is the only description of "what the function is doing", but it gives you
> > > > > > > > no clue to why it's using those magic numbers. There should be comments
> > > > > > > > about how the magic numbers relate to the what.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sure, but rcu_gp_fqs_loop() is a static, internal function.  I agree
> > > > > > > that better documentation would be usefui for people who want to
> > > > > > > modify the internals of the RCU infrastructure, but it's not something
> > > > > > > that should be in kernel documentation for newcomers to kernel
> > > > > > > development.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When we talk about making the kernel code more accessible, it's really
> > > > > > > important to keep in mind that different audiences may have different
> > > > > > > needs, and too much information can be just as confusing as too
> > > > > > > little.  It seems likely that most newcomers aren't going to be
> > > > > > > looking to make changes to important systems like RCU.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That being said, even though most newcomers aren't probably going to
> > > > > > > be making changes to file systems, as a file system maintainer I
> > > > > > > admittedly to have a vested interest in making easier for
> > > > > > > intermediate-level kernel developers who might take an interest to
> > > > > > > ext4 development to have an easy path to do so.  So I get where Paul
> > > > > > > is coming from.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When we're talking about making the kernel code more accessible, we
> > > > > > > need need to be very explicit about which target audiences we are
> > > > > > > targetting, because the strategies might be different for different
> > > > > > > readers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is how I group them:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.	RCU users in the Linux kernel.	Largish group.	Addressed by much
> > > > > > 	of the Documentation/RCU contents, the occasional LWN article,
> > > > > > 	blog posts, and by RCU experts in various subsystems.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.	RCU users in userspace.  Modest group, but growing.  LWN articles,
> > > > > > 	blog posts, an academic paper or three, and a number of people
> > > > > > 	who have implemented some form or another of RCU.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3.	Userspace RCU implementations.  Smallish group, but there are
> > > > > > 	quite a few implementations out there.  I don't deliberately
> > > > > > 	target anything to this group, but it is quite possible that
> > > > > > 	some of the writings for the other groups have been helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4.	Linux-kernel RCU implementation.  Small group, though a largish
> > > > > > 	one if we include all the people who have gotten at least one
> > > > > > 	patch accepted.  Comments, Linux-kernel RCU Design Documents [1],
> > > > > > 	Documentation/RCU/Design, a few LWN articles, a few blog posts,
> > > > > > 	and the several regular developers and maintainers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I would like to think that Section 9.5 of "Is Parallel Programming
> > > > > > Hard, And, If So, What Can You Do About It?" [2] has been helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What groups should I be adding?
> > > > >
> > > > > In the case of the scheduler, I observe some unexpected behavior, and then
> > > > > I have the feeling that I backtrack through the code coming from a
> > > > > direction that was not anticipated by the person who wrote the comments
> > > > > (sometimes inline comments, more likely the comments in the commit tht
> > > > > introduced the line I am wondering about).  But I'm not sure how to place
> > > > > RCU.  My impression is that it has a more monolithic implementation, and
> > > > > that I would only ever consider it to be a block box, not something I
> > > > > would debug my way into.  But perhaps people felt that way about the
> > > > > scheduler functions I am looking at as well.  Over time, there have surely
> > > > > been performance improvements in RCU as well.  It seems hard to anticipate
> > > > > what information people will need.
> > > >
> > > > Although RCU does use heuristics, I would say that its operation adapts
> > > > less to dynamic conditions than does the scheduler.  RCU is mostly an
> > > > observer of state, while the scheduler's job is mostly a controller
> > > > of state.
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe one could consider that division by a constant is sufficiently rare
> > > > > in the kernel that it should always be documented?
> > > >
> > > > If it is (for example) division by 10 in code that converts binary
> > > > integers to char, or code computing an average, I would not expect a
> > > > comment to be needed.
> > > >
> > > > But I do feel the need to ask what division you are referring to.  ;-)
> > > 
> > > j = (j + 2) / 3;
> > 
> > "Divide by three rounding up."
> 
> That's not *that* obvious, but ok, but then why 3?
> 
> Then later there is:
>          WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.jiffies_kick_kthreads,
>                    jiffies + (j ? 3 * j : 2));
> 
> Which I assume is related - but then why the 2?

Would the two of you (Julia and Dave) like to join in with Steve and
myself walking through this function and its caller?

> Curiosly my local tame Qwen3 LLM explained the rounding up:
> 
> > I see some code doing 'j = (j + 2) / 3'  - what's it trying to do?
> The expression `j = (j + 2) / 3` is a clever way to **round up an
> integer division by 3** — that is, it computes the ceiling of `j / 3`
> for non-negative integers.

Good to see!

							Thanx, Paul

> Dave
> 
> > 
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> > 
> > > > > julia
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 							Thanx, Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GCdQC8SDbb54W1shjEXqGZ0Rq8a6kIeYutdSIajfpLA/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0#heading=h.ytgz5i5df43s
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [2] https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/perfbook/perfbook.html
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > 
> -- 
>  -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code -------   
> / Dr. David Alan Gilbert    |       Running GNU/Linux       | Happy  \ 
> \        dave @ treblig.org |                               | In Hex /
>  \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org   |_______/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists