Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Dec 2010 10:13:35 +0800 | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 15/20] rcu: Keep gpnum and completed fields synchronized |
| |
On 12/18/2010 04:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> > > When a CPU that was in an extended quiescent state wakes > up and catches up with grace periods that remote CPUs > completed on its behalf, we update the completed field > but not the gpnum that keeps a stale value of a backward > grace period ID. > > Later, note_new_gpnum() will interpret the shift between > the local CPU and the node grace period ID as some new grace > period to handle and will then start to hunt quiescent state. > > But if every grace periods have already been completed, this > interpretation becomes broken. And we'll be stuck in clusters > of spurious softirqs because rcu_report_qs_rdp() will make > this broken state run into infinite loop. > > The solution, as suggested by Lai Jiangshan, is to ensure that > the gpnum and completed fields are well synchronized when we catch > up with completed grace periods on their behalf by other cpus. > This way we won't start noting spurious new grace periods. > > Suggested-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > kernel/rcutree.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c > index 916f42b..8105271 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcutree.c > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c > @@ -680,6 +680,15 @@ __rcu_process_gp_end(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp, struct rcu_dat > rdp->completed = rnp->completed; > > /* > + * If we were in an extended quiescent state, we may have > + * missed some grace periods that others CPUs took care on > + * our behalf. Catch up with this state to avoid noting > + * spurious new grace periods. > + */ > + if (rdp->completed > rdp->gpnum) > + rdp->gpnum = rdp->completed;
Need to use ULONG_CMP_LT(rdp->gpnum, rdp->completed) instead.
> + > + /* > * If another CPU handled our extended quiescent states and > * we have no more grace period to complete yet, then stop > * chasing quiescent states.
| |