lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 5/9] RCU: CPU hotplug support for preemptible RCU
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 08:38:49PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 09/10, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.22-d-schedclassic/kernel/rcupreempt.c 2007-08-22 15:45:28.000000000 -0700
> > +++ linux-2.6.22-e-hotplugcpu/kernel/rcupreempt.c 2007-08-22 15:56:22.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ enum rcu_mb_flag_values {
> > };
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(enum rcu_mb_flag_values, rcu_mb_flag) = rcu_mb_done;
> >
> > +static cpumask_t rcu_cpu_online_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
>
> I'd suggest to append "__read_mostly"

Makes sense!

> > +void rcu_offline_cpu_rt(int cpu)
> > +{
> > [...snip...]
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rcu_ctrlblk.fliplock, oldirq);
> > + rcu_check_mb(cpu);
> > + if (per_cpu(rcu_flip_flag, cpu) == rcu_flipped) {
> > + smp_mb(); /* Subsequent counter accesses must see new value */
> > + per_cpu(rcu_flip_flag, cpu) = rcu_flip_seen;
> > + smp_mb(); /* Subsequent RCU read-side critical sections */
> > + /* seen -after- acknowledgement. */
>
> Imho, all these barriers are unneeded and confusing, we can't do them on behalf
> of a dead CPU anyway. Can't we just do
>
> per_cpu(rcu_mb_flag, cpu) = rcu_mb_done;
> per_cpu(rcu_flip_flag, cpu) = rcu_flip_seen;
> ?

You are likely correct, but this is a slow path, extremely hard to
stress test, and I am freakin' paranoid about this sort of thing.

> Why can't we also do
>
> __get_cpu_var(rcu_flipctr)[0] += per_cpu(rcu_flipctr, cpu)[0];
> per_cpu(rcu_flipctr, cpu)[0] = 0;
> __get_cpu_var(rcu_flipctr)[1] += per_cpu(rcu_flipctr, cpu)[1];
> per_cpu(rcu_flipctr, cpu)[1] = 0;
>
> ? This way rcu_try_flip_waitzero() can also use rcu_cpu_online_map. This cpu
> is dead, nobody can modify per_cpu(rcu_flipctr, cpu). And we can't confuse
> rcu_try_flip_waitzero(), we are holding rcu_ctrlblk.fliplock.

Very good point!!! This would reduce latencies on systems where
the number of possible CPUs greatly exceeds that of the number of
online CPUs, so seems quite worthwhile.

> > +void __devinit rcu_online_cpu_rt(int cpu)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long oldirq;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rcu_ctrlblk.fliplock, oldirq);
> > + cpu_set(cpu, rcu_cpu_online_map);
>
> What if _cpu_up() fails? I think rcu_cpu_notify(CPU_UP_CANCELED) should call
> rcu_offline_cpu_rt() too.

Good catch, will fix!!!

Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-01 19:09    [W:0.081 / U:2.132 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site