From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Earlier commits in this series allow battery-powered systems to build their kernels with the default-disabled CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=y Kconfig option. This Kconfig option causes call_rcu() to delay its callbacks in order to batch callbacks. This means that a given RCU grace period covers more callbacks, thus reducing the number of grace periods, in turn reducing the amount of energy consumed, which increases battery lifetime which can be a very good thing. This is not a subtle effect: In some important use cases, the battery lifetime is increased by more than 10%. This CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=y option is available only for CPUs that offload callbacks, for example, CPUs mentioned in the rcu_nocbs kernel boot parameter passed to kernels built with CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y. Delaying callbacks is normally not a problem because most callbacks do nothing but free memory. If the system is short on memory, a shrinker will kick all currently queued lazy callbacks out of their laziness, thus freeing their memory in short order. Similarly, the rcu_barrier() function, which blocks until all currently queued callbacks are invoked, will also kick lazy callbacks, thus enabling rcu_barrier() to complete in a timely manner. However, there are some cases where laziness is not a good option. For example, synchronize_rcu() invokes call_rcu(), and blocks until the newly queued callback is invoked. It would not be a good for synchronize_rcu() to block for ten seconds, even on an idle system. Therefore, synchronize_rcu() invokes call_rcu_flush() instead of call_rcu(). The arrival of a non-lazy call_rcu_flush() callback on a given CPU kicks any lazy callbacks that might be already queued on that CPU. After all, if there is going to be a grace period, all callbacks might as well get full benefit from it. Yes, this could be done the other way around by creating a call_rcu_lazy(), but earlier experience with this approach and feedback at the 2022 Linux Plumbers Conference shifted the approach to call_rcu() being lazy with call_rcu_flush() for the few places where laziness is inappropriate. And another call_rcu() instance that cannot be lazy is the one on the percpu refcounter's "per-CPU to atomic switch" code path, which uses RCU when switching to atomic mode. The enqueued callback wakes up waiters waiting in the percpu_ref_switch_waitq. Allowing this callback to be lazy would result in unacceptable slowdowns for users of per-CPU refcounts, such as blk_pre_runtime_suspend(). Therefore, make __percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic() use call_rcu_flush() in order to revert to the old behavior. Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx> --- lib/percpu-refcount.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/lib/percpu-refcount.c b/lib/percpu-refcount.c index e5c5315da2741..65c58a029297d 100644 --- a/lib/percpu-refcount.c +++ b/lib/percpu-refcount.c @@ -230,7 +230,8 @@ static void __percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic(struct percpu_ref *ref, percpu_ref_noop_confirm_switch; percpu_ref_get(ref); /* put after confirmation */ - call_rcu(&ref->data->rcu, percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu); + call_rcu_flush(&ref->data->rcu, + percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu); } static void __percpu_ref_switch_to_percpu(struct percpu_ref *ref) -- 2.31.1.189.g2e36527f23
