Re: [PATCH rcu 01/12] rcu: Decrease FQS scan wait time in case of callback overloading

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 6/21/2022 3:50 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
The force-quiesce-state loop function rcu_gp_fqs_loop() checks for
callback overloading and does an immediate initial scan for idle CPUs
if so.  However, subsequent rescans will be carried out at as leisurely a
rate as they always are, as specified by the rcutree.jiffies_till_next_fqs
module parameter.  It might be tempting to just continue immediately
rescanning, but this turns the RCU grace-period kthread into a CPU hog.
It might also be tempting to reduce the time between rescans to a single
jiffy, but this can be problematic on larger systems.

This commit therefore divides the normal time between rescans by three,
rounding up.  Thus a small system running at HZ=1000 that is suffering
from callback overload will wait only one jiffy instead of the normal
three between rescans.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  kernel/rcu/tree.c | 5 +++++
  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index c25ba442044a6..c19d5926886fb 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -1993,6 +1993,11 @@ static noinline_for_stack void rcu_gp_fqs_loop(void)
  			WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.jiffies_kick_kthreads,
  				   jiffies + (j ? 3 * j : 2));
  		}
+		if (rcu_state.cbovld) {
+			j = (j + 2) / 3;
+			if (j <= 0)
+				j = 1;
+		}

We update 'j' here, after setting rcu_state.jiffies_force_qs

    WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.jiffies_force_qs, jiffies + j)

So, we return from swait_event_idle_timeout_exclusive after 1/3 time duration.

    swait_event_idle_timeout_exclusive(rcu_state.gp_wq,
				 rcu_gp_fqs_check_wake(&gf), j);

This can result in !timer_after check to return false and we will
enter the 'else' (stray signal block) code?

This might not matter for first 2 fqs loop iterations, where RCU_GP_FLAG_OVLD is set in 'gf', but subsequent iterations won't benefit
from this patch?


if (!time_after(rcu_state.jiffies_force_qs, jiffies) ||
	(gf & (RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS | RCU_GP_FLAG_OVLD))) {
			...
} else {
	/* Deal with stray signal. */
}


So, do we need to move this calculation above the 'if' block which sets rcu_state.jiffies_force_qs?
		if (!ret) {

			WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.jiffies_force_qs, jiffies +
						j);...
		}

Thanks
Neeraj

  		trace_rcu_grace_period(rcu_state.name, rcu_state.gp_seq,
  				       TPS("fqswait"));
  		WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.gp_state, RCU_GP_WAIT_FQS);



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux