Remove all rcu head inits. We don't care about the RCU head state before passing
it to call_rcu() anyway. Only leave the "on_stack" variants so debugobjects can
keep track of objects on stack.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
The current version of RCU_FAST_NO_HZ reproduces the old CLASSIC_RCU
dyntick-idle bug, as it fails to detect CPUs that have interrupted
or NMIed out of dyntick-idle mode. Fix this by making rcu_needs_cpu()
check the state in the per-CPU rcu_dynticks variables, thus correctly
detecting the dyntick-idle state from an RCU perspective.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Print boot-time messages if tracing is enabled, if fanout is set
to non-default values, if exact fanout is specified, if accelerated
dyntick-idle grace periods have been enabled, if RCU-lockdep is enabled,
if rcutorture has been boot-time enabled, if the CPU stall detector has
been disabled, or if four-level hierarchy has been enabled.
This is all for TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU. TINY_RCU will be handled
separately, if at all.
Suggested-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
The addition of preemptible RCU to treercu resulted in a bit of
confusion and inefficiency surrounding the handling of context switches
for RCU-sched and for RCU-preempt. For RCU-sched, a context switch
is a quiescent state, pure and simple, just like it always has been.
For RCU-preempt, a context switch is in no way a quiescent state, but
special handling is required when a task blocks in an RCU read-side
critical section.
However, the callout from the scheduler and the outer loop in ksoftirqd
still calls something named rcu_sched_qs(), whose name is no longer
accurate. Furthermore, when rcu_check_callbacks() notes an RCU-sched
quiescent state, it ends up unnecessarily (though harmlessly, aside
from the performance hit) enqueuing the current task if it happens to
be running in an RCU-preempt read-side critical section. This not only
increases the maximum latency of scheduler_tick(), it also needlessly
increases the overhead of the next outermost rcu_read_unlock() invocation.
This patch addresses this situation by separating the notion of RCU's
context-switch handling from that of RCU-sched's quiescent states.
The context-switch handling is covered by rcu_note_context_switch() in
general and by rcu_preempt_note_context_switch() for preemptible RCU.
This permits rcu_sched_qs() to handle quiescent states and only quiescent
states. It also reduces the maximum latency of scheduler_tick(), though
probably by much less than a microsecond. Finally, it means that tasks
within preemptible-RCU read-side critical sections avoid incurring the
overhead of queuing unless there really is a context switch.
Suggested-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Offline CPUs are not in nohz_cpu_mask, but can be ignored when checking
for the last non-dyntick-idle CPU. This patch therefore only checks
online CPUs for not being dyntick idle, allowing fast entry into
full-system dyntick-idle state even when there are some offline CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Currently, rcu_needs_cpu() simply checks whether the current CPU
has an outstanding RCU callback, which means that the last CPU
to go into dyntick-idle mode might wait a few ticks for the
relevant grace periods to complete. However, if all the other
CPUs are in dyntick-idle mode, and if this CPU is in a quiescent
state (which it is for RCU-bh and RCU-sched any time that we are
considering going into dyntick-idle mode), then the grace period
is instantly complete.
This patch therefore repeatedly invokes the RCU grace-period
machinery in order to force any needed grace periods to complete
quickly. It does so a limited number of times in order to
prevent starvation by an RCU callback function that might pass
itself to call_rcu().
However, if any CPU other than the current one is not in
dyntick-idle mode, fall back to simply checking (with fix to bug
noted by Lai Jiangshan). Also, take advantage of last
grace-period forcing, the opportunity to do so noted by Steve
Rostedt. And apply simplified #ifdef condition suggested by
Frederic Weisbecker.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference: <1266887105-1528-15-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
The number of "quiet" functions has grown recently, and the
names are no longer very descriptive. The point of all of these
functions is to do some portion of the task of reporting a
quiescent state, so rename them accordingly:
o cpu_quiet() becomes rcu_report_qs_rdp(), which reports a
quiescent state to the per-CPU rcu_data structure. If this
turns out to be a new quiescent state for this grace period,
then rcu_report_qs_rnp() will be invoked to propagate the
quiescent state up the rcu_node hierarchy.
o cpu_quiet_msk() becomes rcu_report_qs_rnp(), which reports
a quiescent state for a given CPU (or possibly a set of CPUs)
up the rcu_node hierarchy.
o cpu_quiet_msk_finish() becomes rcu_report_qs_rsp(), which
reports a full set of quiescent states to the global rcu_state
structure.
o task_quiet() becomes rcu_report_unblock_qs_rnp(), which reports
a quiescent state due to a task exiting an RCU read-side critical
section that had previously blocked in that same critical section.
As indicated by the new name, this type of quiescent state is
reported up the rcu_node hierarchy (using rcu_report_qs_rnp()
to do so).
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference: <12597846163698-git-send-email->
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
When the last CPU of a given leaf rcu_node structure goes
offline, all of the tasks queued on that leaf rcu_node structure
(due to having blocked in their current RCU read-side critical
sections) are requeued onto the root rcu_node structure. This
requeuing is carried out by rcu_preempt_offline_tasks().
However, it is possible that these queued tasks are the only
thing preventing the leaf rcu_node structure from reporting a
quiescent state up the rcu_node hierarchy. Unfortunately, the
old code would fail to do this reporting, resulting in a
grace-period stall given the following sequence of events:
1. Kernel built for more than 32 CPUs on 32-bit systems or for more
than 64 CPUs on 64-bit systems, so that there is more than one
rcu_node structure. (Or CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT is artificially set
to a number smaller than CONFIG_NR_CPUS.)
2. The kernel is built with CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU.
3. A task running on a CPU associated with a given leaf rcu_node
structure blocks while in an RCU read-side critical section
-and- that CPU has not yet passed through a quiescent state
for the current RCU grace period. This will cause the task
to be queued on the leaf rcu_node's blocked_tasks[] array, in
particular, on the element of this array corresponding to the
current grace period.
4. Each of the remaining CPUs corresponding to this same leaf rcu_node
structure pass through a quiescent state. However, the task is
still in its RCU read-side critical section, so these quiescent
states cannot be reported further up the rcu_node hierarchy.
Nevertheless, all bits in the leaf rcu_node structure's ->qsmask
field are now zero.
5. Each of the remaining CPUs go offline. (The events in step
#4 and #5 can happen in any order as long as each CPU passes
through a quiescent state before going offline.)
6. When the last CPU goes offline, __rcu_offline_cpu() will invoke
rcu_preempt_offline_tasks(), which will move the task to the
root rcu_node structure, but without reporting a quiescent state
up the rcu_node hierarchy (and this failure to report a quiescent
state is the bug).
But because this leaf rcu_node structure's ->qsmask field is
already zero and its ->block_tasks[] entries are all empty,
force_quiescent_state() will skip this rcu_node structure.
Therefore, grace periods are now hung.
This patch abstracts some code out of rcu_read_unlock_special(),
calling the result task_quiet() by analogy with cpu_quiet(), and
invokes task_quiet() from both rcu_read_lock_special() and
__rcu_offline_cpu(). Invoking task_quiet() from
__rcu_offline_cpu() reports the quiescent state up the rcu_node
hierarchy, fixing the bug. This ends up requiring a separate
lock_class_key per level of the rcu_node hierarchy, which this
patch also provides.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference: <12589088301770-git-send-email->
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
The rdp->passed_quiesc_completed fields are used to properly
associate the recorded quiescent state with a grace period. It
is OK to wrongly associate a given quiescent state with a
preceding grace period, but it is fatal to associate a given
quiescent state with a grace period that begins after the
quiescent state occurred. Grace periods are numbered, and the
following fields track them:
o ->gpnum is the number of the grace period currently in
progress, or the number of the last grace period to
complete if no grace period is currently in progress.
o ->completed is the number of the last grace period to
have completed.
These two fields are equal if there is no grace period in
progress, otherwise ->gpnum is one greater than ->completed.
But the rdp->passed_quiesc_completed field compared against
->completed, and if equal, the quiescent state is presumed to
count against the current grace period.
The earlier code copied rdp->completed to
rdp->passed_quiesc_completed, which has been made to work, but
is error-prone. In contrast, copying one less than rdp->gpnum
is guaranteed safe, because rdp->gpnum is not incremented until
after the start of the corresponding grace period. At the end of
the grace period, when ->completed has incremented, then any
quiescent periods recorded previously will be discarded.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference: <12578890421011-git-send-email->
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
If the following sequence of events occurs, then
TREE_PREEMPT_RCU will hang waiting for a grace period to
complete, eventually OOMing the system:
o A TREE_PREEMPT_RCU build of the kernel is booted on a system
with more than 64 physical CPUs present (32 on a 32-bit system).
Alternatively, a TREE_PREEMPT_RCU build of the kernel is booted
with RCU_FANOUT set to a sufficiently small value that the
physical CPUs populate two or more leaf rcu_node structures.
o A task is preempted in an RCU read-side critical section
while running on a CPU corresponding to a given leaf rcu_node
structure.
o All CPUs corresponding to this same leaf rcu_node structure
record quiescent states for the current grace period.
o All of these same CPUs go offline (hence the need for enough
physical CPUs to populate more than one leaf rcu_node structure).
This causes the preempted task to be moved to the root rcu_node
structure.
At this point, there is nothing left to cause the quiescent
state to be propagated up the rcu_node tree, so the current
grace period never completes.
The simplest fix, especially after considering the deadlock
possibilities, is to detect this situation when the last CPU is
offlined, and to set that CPU's ->qsmask bit in its leaf
rcu_node structure. This will cause the next invocation of
force_quiescent_state() to end the grace period.
Without this fix, this hang can be triggered in an hour or so on
some machines with rcutorture and random CPU onlining/offlining.
With this fix, these same machines pass a full 10 hours of this
sort of abuse.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
Cc: josh@joshtriplett.org
Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com
Cc: niv@us.ibm.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com
LKML-Reference: <20091015162614.GA19131@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
