Re: [PATCH 0/2] rcu: Fix series of spurious RCU softirqs

From: Frederic Weisbecker
Date: Thu Nov 25 2010 - 02:39:10 EST


On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 11:42:34AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 08:31 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've observed some not so unfrequent series of spurious rcu
> > softirqs, sometimes happening at each ticks for a random
> > while.
> >
> > These patches aims at fixing them.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Frederic Weisbecker (2):
> > rcu: Don't chase unnecessary quiescent states after extended grace periods
> > rcu: Stop checking quiescent states after grace period completion from remote
> >
>
> If we ensure rdp->gpnum >= rdp->completed is always true, the problems as
> you described will not be existed. Or maybe I misunderstand you.
>
> rdp->gpnum >= rdp->completed is a very important guarantee I think.
> (In my RCURING, it is guaranteed.) I'm afraid there are some other
> problems still hidden if it is not guaranteed.
>
> so I recommend: (code is better than words)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index d5bc439..af4e87a 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -648,6 +648,13 @@ __rcu_process_gp_end(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp, struct rcu_dat
>
> /* Remember that we saw this grace-period completion. */
> rdp->completed = rnp->completed;
> +
> + /* Ensure ->gpnum >= ->completed after NO_HZ */
> + if (unlikely(rnp->completed - rdp->gpnum > 0
> + || rdp->gpnum - rnp->gpnum > 0)) {
> + rdp->gpnum = rnp->completed;
> + rdp->qs_pending = 0;


That's an alternative to my first patch yeah. And if rdp->gpnum >= rdp->completed
must be a guarantee outside the rnp lock, then it's certainly better because
the lock is relaxed between rcu_process_gp_end() and note_new_gpnum(), and
both values are async in this lockless frame.

But perhaps this shouldn't touch rdp->qs_pending:

"if (rnp->completed > rdp->gpnum || rdp->gpnum > rnp->gpnum)" is not
a guarantee that we don't need to find quiescent states.

but rnp->completed == rnp->gpnum would provide that guarantee.
That said, note_new_gp_new() would fix the value of rdp->qs_pending.

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