[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 1/4] xen/rcu: don't use stop_machine_run() for rcu_barrier()
On 16.03.20 16:24, Igor Druzhinin wrote: On 13/03/2020 13:06, Juergen Gross wrote:Today rcu_barrier() is calling stop_machine_run() to synchronize all physical cpus in order to ensure all pending rcu calls have finished when returning. As stop_machine_run() is using tasklets this requires scheduling of idle vcpus on all cpus imposing the need to call rcu_barrier() on idle cpus only in case of core scheduling being active, as otherwise a scheduling deadlock would occur. There is no need at all to do the syncing of the cpus in tasklets, as rcu activity is started in __do_softirq() called whenever softirq activity is allowed. So rcu_barrier() can easily be modified to use softirq for synchronization of the cpus no longer requiring any scheduling activity. As there already is a rcu softirq reuse that for the synchronization. Remove the barrier element from struct rcu_data as it isn't used. Finally switch rcu_barrier() to return void as it now can never fail. Partially-based-on-patch-by: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> --- V2: - add recursion detection V3: - fix races (Igor Druzhinin) V5: - rename done_count to pending_count (Jan Beulich) - fix race (Jan Beulich) V6: - add barrier (Julien Grall) - add ASSERT() (Julien Grall) - hold cpu_map lock until end of rcu_barrier() (Julien Grall) --- xen/common/rcupdate.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/common/rcupdate.c b/xen/common/rcupdate.c index 03d84764d2..ed9083d2b2 100644 --- a/xen/common/rcupdate.c +++ b/xen/common/rcupdate.c @@ -83,7 +83,6 @@ struct rcu_data { struct rcu_head **donetail; long blimit; /* Upper limit on a processed batch */ int cpu; - struct rcu_head barrier; long last_rs_qlen; /* qlen during the last resched *//* 3) idle CPUs handling */@@ -91,6 +90,7 @@ struct rcu_data { bool idle_timer_active;bool process_callbacks;+ bool barrier_active; };/*@@ -143,51 +143,85 @@ static int qhimark = 10000; static int qlowmark = 100; static int rsinterval = 1000;-struct rcu_barrier_data {- struct rcu_head head; - atomic_t *cpu_count; -}; +/* + * rcu_barrier() handling: + * cpu_count holds the number of cpus required to finish barrier handling. + * pending_count is initialized to nr_cpus + 1. + * Cpus are synchronized via softirq mechanism. rcu_barrier() is regarded to + * be active if pending_count is not zero. In case rcu_barrier() is called on + * multiple cpus it is enough to check for pending_count being not zero on entry + * and to call process_pending_softirqs() in a loop until pending_count drops to + * zero, before starting the new rcu_barrier() processing. + * In order to avoid hangs when rcu_barrier() is called multiple times on the + * same cpu in fast sequence and a slave cpu couldn't drop out of the + * barrier handling fast enough a second counter pending_count is needed. + * The rcu_barrier() invoking cpu will wait until pending_count reaches 1 + * (meaning that all cpus have finished processing the barrier) and then will + * reset pending_count to 0 to enable entering rcu_barrier() again. + */ +static atomic_t cpu_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0); +static atomic_t pending_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);static void rcu_barrier_callback(struct rcu_head *head){ - struct rcu_barrier_data *data = container_of( - head, struct rcu_barrier_data, head); - atomic_inc(data->cpu_count); + smp_wmb(); /* Make all previous writes visible to other cpus. */ + atomic_dec(&cpu_count); }-static int rcu_barrier_action(void *_cpu_count)+static void rcu_barrier_action(void) { - struct rcu_barrier_data data = { .cpu_count = _cpu_count }; - - ASSERT(!local_irq_is_enabled()); - local_irq_enable(); + struct rcu_head head;/** When callback is executed, all previously-queued RCU work on this CPU - * is completed. When all CPUs have executed their callback, data.cpu_count - * will have been incremented to include every online CPU. + * is completed. When all CPUs have executed their callback, cpu_count + * will have been decremented to 0. */ - call_rcu(&data.head, rcu_barrier_callback); + call_rcu(&head, rcu_barrier_callback);- while ( atomic_read(data.cpu_count) != num_online_cpus() )+ while ( atomic_read(&cpu_count) ) { process_pending_softirqs(); cpu_relax(); }- local_irq_disable();- - return 0; + atomic_dec(&pending_count); }-/*- * As rcu_barrier() is using stop_machine_run() it is allowed to be used in - * idle context only (see comment for stop_machine_run()). - */ -int rcu_barrier(void) +void rcu_barrier(void) { - atomic_t cpu_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0); - return stop_machine_run(rcu_barrier_action, &cpu_count, NR_CPUS); + unsigned int n_cpus; + + ASSERT(!in_irq() && local_irq_is_enabled()); + + for ( ;; ) + { + if ( !atomic_read(&pending_count) && get_cpu_maps() ) + {If the whole action is happening while cpu_maps are taken why do you need to check pending_count first? I think the logic of this loop could be simplified if taken this into account. get_cpu_maps() can be successful on multiple cpus (its a read_lock()). Testing pending_count avoids hammering on the cache lines. Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |