On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 09:34:34PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 03:17:56PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> [...]
> > But rcutorture already has tests for RCU priority boosting. Or are those
> > failing in some way?
>
> Yes there are tests, but I thought of just a simple experiment to study this.
> Purely since it is existing RCU kernel code that I'd like to understand. And
> me/Daniel are also looking into possibly using run-time / trace-based
> verification some of these behaviors.
The functionality of rcu_state.cbovld should make that more entertaining.
But I would guess that the initial model would ignore memory footprint
and just model RCU priority boosting as kicking in a fixed time after
the beginning of the grace period.
Or do you guys have something else in mind?
Thanx, Paul
PS. Steve, yes, I do well remember our earlier discussions about readers
inheriting priority from the highest-priority synchronize_rcu(). ;-)
