lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Use case for TASKS_RCU
On Mon, 22 May 2017 17:00:36 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> >
> > Hmmm... The goal is to make sure that any task that was preempted
> > or running at a given point in time passes through a voluntary
> > context switch (or userspace execution, or, ...).
> >
> > What is the simplest way to get this job done? To Ingo's point, I
> > bet that there is a simpler way than the current TASKS_RCU
> > implementation.
> >
> > Ingo, if I make it fit into 100 lines of code, would you be OK with
> > it? I probably need a one-line hook at task-creation time and
> > another at task-exit time, if that makes a difference.
>
> And please see below for such a patch, which does add (just barely)
> fewer than 100 lines net.
>
> Unfortunately, it does not work, as I should have known ahead of time
> from the dyntick-idle experience. Not all context switches go through
> context_switch(). :-/

Wait. What context switch doesn't go through a context switch? Or do
you mean a user/kernel context switch?

-- Steve

>
> I believe this is fixable, more or less like dyntick-idle's
> half-interrupts were fixable, but it will likely be a few days. Not
> clear whether the result will be simpler than current TASKS_RCU, but
> there is only one way to find out. ;-)
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-05-23 21:40    [W:0.100 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site