On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 01:51:29PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 06:34:03PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > > This is v6. It is based on the Paul's "dev" branch: > > > > HEAD: f1bfe538c7970283040a7188a291aca9f18f0c42 > > > > please note, that patches should be applied from scratch, > > i.e. the v5 has to be dropped from the "dev". > > > > v5 -> v6: > > - Fix a race due to realising a wait-head from the gp-kthread; > > - Use our own private workqueue with WQ_MEM_RECLAIM to have > > at least one execution context. > > > > v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240220183115.74124-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/ > > v4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZZ2bi5iPwXLgjB-f@xxxxxxxxxx/T/ > > v3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cd45b0b5-f86b-43fb-a5f3-47d340cd4f9f@paulmck-laptop/T/ > > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231030131254.488186-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/T/ > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231025140915.590390-1-urezki@xxxxxxxxx/T/ > > Queued in place of your earlier series, thank you! > Thank you! > > Not urgent, but which rcutorture scenario should be pressed into service > testing this? > I tested with setting '5*TREE01 5*TREE02 5*TREE03 5*TREE04' apart of that i used some private test cases. The rcutree.rcu_normal_wake_from_gp=1 has to be passed also. Also, "rcuscale" can be used to stress the "cur_ops->sync()" path: <snip> #! /usr/bin/env bash LOOPS=1 for (( i=0; i<$LOOPS; i++ )); do tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/kvm.sh --memory 10G --torture rcuscale \ --allcpus \ --kconfig CONFIG_NR_CPUS=64 \ --kconfig CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y \ --kconfig CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_DEFAULT_ALL=y \ --kconfig CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=n \ --bootargs "rcuscale.nwriters=200 rcuscale.nreaders=220 rcuscale.minruntime=50000 \ torture.disable_onoff_at_boot rcutree.rcu_normal_wake_from_gp=1" --trust-make echo "Done $i" done <snip> -- Uladzislau Rezki
