Re: [PATCH v2 15/45] rcu: Use get/put_online_cpus_atomic() to preventCPU offline

From: Srivatsa S. Bhat
Date: Wed Jun 26 2013 - 10:13:13 EST


On 06/26/2013 03:30 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 01:57:55AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able
>> to depend on disabling preemption to prevent CPUs from going offline
>> from under us.
>>
>> In RCU code, rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs() checks if a CPU is offline,
>> while being protected by a spinlock. Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic()
>> APIs to prevent CPUs from going offline, while invoking from atomic context.
>
> I am not completely sure that this is needed. Here is a (quite possibly
> flawed) argument for its not being needed:
>
> o rcu_gp_init() holds off CPU-hotplug operations during
> grace-period initialization. Therefore, RCU will avoid
> looking for quiescent states from CPUs that were offline
> (and thus in an extended quiescent state) at the beginning
> of the grace period.
>
> o If force_qs_rnp() is looking for a quiescent state from
> a given CPU, and if it senses that CPU as being offline,
> then even without synchronization we know that the CPU
> was offline some time during the current grace period.
>
> After all, it was online at the beginning of the grace
> period (otherwise, we would not be looking at it at all),
> and our later sampling of its state must have therefore
> happened after the start of the grace period. Given that
> the grace period has not yet ended, it also has to happened
> before the end of the grace period.
>
> o Therefore, we should be able to sample the offline state
> without synchronization.
>

Thanks a lot for explaining the synchronization design in detail, Paul!
I agree that get/put_online_cpus_atomic() is not necessary here.

Regarding the debug checks under CONFIG_DEBUG_HOTPLUG_CPU, to avoid
false-positives, I'm thinking of introducing a few _nocheck() variants,
on a case-by-case basis, like cpu_is_offline_nocheck() (useful here in RCU)
and for_each_online_cpu_nocheck() (useful in percpu-counter code, as
pointed out by Tejun Heo). These fine synchronization details are kinda
hard to encapsulate in that debug logic, so we can use the _nocheck()
variants here to avoid getting splats when running with DEBUG_HOTPLUG_CPU
enabled.

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

--
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/