On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:25:51AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 12:46:24PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 05:27:32PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > > > Hello rcu folks, > > > > > > I thought it'd better to announce it if those spawnings fail because of > > > !rcu_scheduler_fully_active. > > > > > > Of course, with the current code, it never happens though. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > It seems in the right spirit, but with your patch a warning always fires. > > rcu_prepare_cpu() is called multiple times, once from rcu_init() and then > > from hotplug paths. > > > > Warning splat stack looks like: > > > > [ 0.398767] Call Trace: > > [ 0.398775] rcu_init+0x6aa/0x724 > > [ 0.398779] start_kernel+0x220/0x4a2 > > [ 0.398780] ? copy_bootdata+0x12/0xac > > [ 0.398782] secondary_startup_64+0xa4/0xb0 > > Thank you both, and I will remove this from my testing queue. > > As Joel says, this is called at various points in the boot sequence, not > all of which are far enough along to support spawning kthreads. > > The real question here is "What types of bugs are we trying to defend > against?" But keeping in mind existing diagnostics. For example, are > there any kthreads for which a persistent failure to spawn would not > emit any error message. My belief is that any such persistent failure > would result in either an in-kernel diagnostic or an rcutorture failure, > but I might well be missing something. > > Thoughts? Or, more to the point, tests demonstrating silence in face > of such a persistent failure? You are right. There wouldn't be a persistent failure because the path turning cpus on always tries to spawn them, *even* in case that the booting sequence is wrong. The current code anyway goes right though. I thought a hole can be there if the code changes so that those kthreads cannot be spawned until the cpu being up, which is the case I was interested in. Again, it's gonna never happen with the current code because it spawns them after setting rcu_scheduler_fully_active to 1 in rcu_spawn_gp_kthead(). And I wrongly thought you placed the rcu_scheduler_fully_active check on spawning just in case. But it seems to be not the case. So I'd better stop working on the warning patch. :) Instead, please check the following trivial fix. Thanks, Byungchul ---8<--- >From 1293d19bb7abf7553d656c81182118eff54e7dc9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@xxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:22:11 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] rcu: Make rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread() return void The return value of rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread() is not used any longer. Change the return type from int to void. Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@xxxxxxx> --- kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 15 +++++++-------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h index 1102765..4e11aa4 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h @@ -1131,7 +1131,7 @@ static void rcu_preempt_boost_start_gp(struct rcu_node *rnp) * already exist. We only create this kthread for preemptible RCU. * Returns zero if all is well, a negated errno otherwise. */ -static int rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(struct rcu_node *rnp) +static void rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(struct rcu_node *rnp) { int rnp_index = rnp - rcu_get_root(); unsigned long flags; @@ -1139,25 +1139,24 @@ static int rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(struct rcu_node *rnp) struct task_struct *t; if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU)) - return 0; + return; if (!rcu_scheduler_fully_active || rcu_rnp_online_cpus(rnp) == 0) - return 0; + return; rcu_state.boost = 1; if (rnp->boost_kthread_task != NULL) - return 0; + return; t = kthread_create(rcu_boost_kthread, (void *)rnp, "rcub/%d", rnp_index); if (IS_ERR(t)) - return PTR_ERR(t); + return; raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node(rnp, flags); rnp->boost_kthread_task = t; raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags); sp.sched_priority = kthread_prio; sched_setscheduler_nocheck(t, SCHED_FIFO, &sp); wake_up_process(t); /* get to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE quickly. */ - return 0; } static void rcu_cpu_kthread_setup(unsigned int cpu) @@ -1265,7 +1264,7 @@ static void __init rcu_spawn_boost_kthreads(void) if (WARN_ONCE(smpboot_register_percpu_thread(&rcu_cpu_thread_spec), "%s: Could not start rcub kthread, OOM is now expected behavior\n", __func__)) return; rcu_for_each_leaf_node(rnp) - (void)rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(rnp); + rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(rnp); } static void rcu_prepare_kthreads(int cpu) @@ -1275,7 +1274,7 @@ static void rcu_prepare_kthreads(int cpu) /* Fire up the incoming CPU's kthread and leaf rcu_node kthread. */ if (rcu_scheduler_fully_active) - (void)rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(rnp); + rcu_spawn_one_boost_kthread(rnp); } #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_BOOST */ -- 1.9.1