While running in nohz_full mode, a task may enqueue a timer while the
tick is stopped. However the only places where the timer wheel,
alongside the timer migration machinery's decision, may reprogram the
next event accordingly with that new timer's expiry are the idle loop or
any IRQ tail.
However neither the idle task nor an interrupt may run on the CPU if it
resumes busy work in userspace for a long while in full dynticks mode.
To solve this, the timer enqueue path raises a self-IPI that will
re-evaluate the timer wheel on its IRQ tail. This asynchronous solution
avoids potential locking inversion.
This is supposed to happen both for local and global timers but commit:
b2cf7507e1 ("timers: Always queue timers on the local CPU")
broke the global timers case with removing the ->is_idle field handling
for the global base. As a result, global timers enqueue may go unnoticed
in nohz_full.
Fix this with restoring the idle tracking of the global timer's base,
allowing self-IPIs again on enqueue time.
Fixes: b2cf7507e1 ("timers: Always queue timers on the local CPU")
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240318230729.15497-3-frederic@kernel.org
The next timer (re-)evaluation, with the purpose of entering/updating
the dyntick mode, can happen from 3 sites and none of them are relevant
while the CPU is offline:
1) The idle loop:
a) From the quick check helping the cpuidle governor to heuristically
predict the best C-state.
b) While stopping the tick.
But if the CPU is offline, the tick has been cancelled and there is
consequently no need to further stop the tick.
2) Remote expiry: when a CPU remotely expires global timers on behalf of
another CPU, the latter target's next timer is re-evaluated
afterwards. However remote expîry doesn't happen on offline CPUs.
3) IRQ exit: on nohz_full mode, the tick is (re-)evaluated on IRQ exit.
But full dynticks is disabled on offline CPUs.
Therefore it is safe to assume that no next dyntick timer lookup can
be performed on offline CPUs.
Assert this expectation to report any surprise.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240225225508.11587-17-frederic@kernel.org
Placing timers at enqueue time on a target CPU based on dubious heuristics
does not make any sense:
1) Most timer wheel timers are canceled or rearmed before they expire.
2) The heuristics to predict which CPU will be busy when the timer expires
are wrong by definition.
So placing the timers at enqueue wastes precious cycles.
The proper solution to this problem is to always queue the timers on the
local CPU and allow the non pinned timers to be pulled onto a busy CPU at
expiry time.
Therefore split the timer storage into local pinned and global timers:
Local pinned timers are always expired on the CPU on which they have been
queued. Global timers can be expired on any CPU.
As long as a CPU is busy it expires both local and global timers. When a
CPU goes idle it arms for the first expiring local timer. If the first
expiring pinned (local) timer is before the first expiring movable timer,
then no action is required because the CPU will wake up before the first
movable timer expires. If the first expiring movable timer is before the
first expiring pinned (local) timer, then this timer is queued into an idle
timerqueue and eventually expired by another active CPU.
To avoid global locking the timerqueues are implemented as a hierarchy. The
lowest level of the hierarchy holds the CPUs. The CPUs are associated to
groups of 8, which are separated per node. If more than one CPU group
exist, then a second level in the hierarchy collects the groups. Depending
on the size of the system more than 2 levels are required. Each group has a
"migrator" which checks the timerqueue during the tick for remote expirable
timers.
If the last CPU in a group goes idle it reports the first expiring event in
the group up to the next group(s) in the hierarchy. If the last CPU goes
idle it arms its timer for the first system wide expiring timer to ensure
that no timer event is missed.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240222103710.32582-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Due to the conversion of the NOHZ timer placement to a pull at expiry
time model, the per CPU timer bases with non pinned timers are no
longer handled only by the local CPU. In case a remote CPU already
expires the non pinned timers base of the local CPU, nothing more
needs to be done by the local CPU. A check at the begin of the expire
timers routine is required, because timer base lock is dropped before
executing the timer callback function.
This is a preparatory work, but has no functional impact right now.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-16-anna-maria@linutronix.de
To prepare for the conversion of the NOHZ timer placement to a pull at
expiry time model it's required to have functionality available getting the
next timer interrupt on a remote CPU.
Locking of the timer bases and getting the information for the next timer
interrupt functionality is split into separate functions. This is required
to be compliant with lock ordering when the new model is in place.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-14-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The functionality for getting the next timer interrupt in
get_next_timer_interrupt() is split into a separate function
fetch_next_timer_interrupt() to be usable by other call sites.
This is preparatory work for the conversion of the NOHZ timer
placement to a pull at expiry time model. No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-13-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The logic for raising a softirq the way it is implemented right now, is
readable for two timer bases. When increasing the number of timer bases,
code gets harder to read. With the introduction of the timer migration
hierarchy, there will be three timer bases.
Therefore restructure the code to use a loop. No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-9-anna-maria@linutronix.de
When adding a timer to the timer wheel using add_timer_on(), it is an
implicitly pinned timer. With the timer pull at expiry time model in place,
the TIMER_PINNED flag is required to make sure timers end up in proper
base.
Set the TIMER_PINNED flag unconditionally when add_timer_on() is executed.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-8-anna-maria@linutronix.de
A timer might be used as a pinned timer (using add_timer_on()) and later on
as non-pinned timer using add_timer(). When the "NOHZ timer pull at expiry
model" is in place, the TIMER_PINNED flag is required to be used whenever a
timer needs to expire on a dedicated CPU. Otherwise the flag must not be
set if expiration on a dedicated CPU is not required.
add_timer_on()'s behavior will be changed during the preparation patches
for the "NOHZ timer pull at expiry model" to unconditionally set the
TIMER_PINNED flag. To be able to clear/ set the flag when queueing a
timer, two variants of add_timer() are introduced.
This is a preparatory step and has no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-6-anna-maria@linutronix.de
When tick is stopped also the timer base is_idle flag is set. When
reentering timer_base_try_to_set_idle() with the tick stopped, there is no
need to check whether the timer base needs to be set idle again. When a
timer was enqueued in the meantime, this is already handled by the
tick_nohz_next_event() call which was executed before
tick_nohz_stop_tick().
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-5-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The timer base is marked idle when get_next_timer_interrupt() is
executed. But the decision whether the tick will be stopped and whether the
system is able to go idle is done later. When the timer bases is marked
idle and a new first timer is enqueued remote an IPI is raised. Even if it
is not required because the tick is not stopped and the timer base is
evaluated again at the next tick.
To prevent this, the timer base is marked idle in tick_nohz_stop_tick() and
get_next_timer_interrupt() is streamlined by only looking for the next timer
interrupt. All other work is postponed to timer_base_try_to_set_idle() which is
called by tick_nohz_stop_tick(). timer_base_try_to_set_idle() never resets
timer_base::is_idle state. This is done when the tick is restarted via
tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick().
With this, tick_sched::tick_stopped and timer_base::is_idle are always in
sync. So there is no longer the need to execute timer_clear_idle() in
tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick(). This was required before, as
tick_nohz_next_event() set timer_base::is_idle even if the tick would not be
stopped. So timer_clear_idle() is only executed, when timer base is idle. So the
check whether timer base is idle, is now no longer required as well.
While at it fix some nearby whitespace damage as well.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-4-anna-maria@linutronix.de
get_next_timer_interrupt() contains two parts for the next timer interrupt
calculation. Those two parts are separated by forwarding the base
clock. But the second part does not depend on the forwarded base
clock.
Therefore restructure get_next_timer_interrupt() to keep things together
which belong together.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-2-anna-maria@linutronix.de
When no timer is queued into an empty timer base, the next_expiry will not
be updated. It was originally calculated as
base->clk + NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA
When the timer base stays empty long enough (> NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA), the
next_expiry value of the empty base suggests that there is a timer pending
soon. This might be more a kind of a theoretical problem, but the fix
doesn't hurt.
Use only base->next_expiry value as nextevt when timers are
pending. Otherwise nextevt will be jiffies + NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA. As all
information is in place, update base->next_expiry value of the empty timer
base as well.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-13-anna-maria@linutronix.de
To improve readability of the code, split base->idle calculation and
expires calculation into separate parts. While at it, update the comment
about timer base idle marking.
Thereby the following subtle change happens if the next event is just one
jiffy ahead and the tick was already stopped: Originally base->is_idle
remains true in this situation. Now base->is_idle turns to false. This may
spare an IPI if a timer is enqueued remotely to an idle CPU that is going
to tick on the next jiffy.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-12-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Forwarding timer base is done when the next expiry value is calculated and
when a new timer is enqueued. When the next expiry value is calculated the
jiffies value is already available and does not need to be reread a second
time.
Splitting out the forward timer base functionality to make it executable
via both contextes - those where jiffies are already known and those, where
jiffies need to be read.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-10-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The current check whether a forward of the timer base is required can be
simplified by using an already existing comparison function which is easier
to read. The related comment is outdated and was not updated when the check
changed in commit 36cd28a4cd ("timers: Lower base clock forwarding
threshold").
Use time_before_eq() for the check and replace the comment by copying the
comment from the same check inside get_next_timer_interrupt(). Move the
precious information of the outdated comment to the proper place in
__run_timers().
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-9-anna-maria@linutronix.de
