Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Sep 2011 02:06:45 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] nohz: Split extended quiescent state handling from nohz switch |
| |
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 07:22:33AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 04:36:43PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 07:30:49PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > It is assumed that rcu won't be used once we switch to tickless > > > mode and until we restart the tick. However this is not always > > > true, as in x86-64 where we dereference the idle notifiers after > > > the tick is stopped. > > > > > > To prepare for fixing this, split the tickless mode switching and > > > RCU extended quiescent state logics. > > > Make tick_nohz_stop/restart_sched_tick() RCU agnostic but provide > > > a new pair of APIs tick_nohz_enter/exit_idle() that keep the > > > old behaviour by handling both the nohz mode and RCU extended > > > quiescent states, then convert every archs to use these. > > > > > > Archs that want to switch to RCU extended QS to some custom points > > > can do it later by changing the parameter in tick_nohz_enter,exit_idle() > > > to false and call rcu_enter,exit() separately. > > > > This approach looks quite good to me! A few comments below. > > But I get RCU stall warnings when running it on powerpc on top of > the patch set at: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/7/64 > > At first glance, it appears that CPUs are entering dyntick-idle > mode without RCU being informed. Any thoughts on diagnostics? > > Thanx, Paul
I've just tested with your rcu/next branch from github and applied my patches on top of it but did not experience a stall in x86.
That may be related to powerpc more precisely, or may be any arch but on some particular condition.
| |