doc.2024.06.06a: Documentation updates. fixes.2024.07.04a: Miscellaneous fixes. mb.2024.06.28a: Grace-period memory-barrier redundancy removal. nocb.2024.06.03a: No-CB CPU updates. rcu-tasks.2024.06.06a: RCU-Tasks updates. rcutorture.2024.06.06a: Torture-test updates. srcu.2024.06.18a: SRCU polled-grace-period updates.
In the synchronize_rcu() common case, we will have less than SR_MAX_USERS_WAKE_FROM_GP number of users per GP. Waking up the kworker is pointless just to free the last injected wait head since at that point, all the users have already been awakened. Introduce a new counter to track this and prevent the wakeup in the common case. [ paulmck: Remove atomic_dec_return_release in cannot-happen state. ] Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> Reviewed-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
The bypass lock contention mitigation assumes there can be at most 2 contenders on the bypass lock, following this scheme: 1) One kthread takes the bypass lock 2) Another one spins on it and increment the contended counter 3) A third one (a bypass enqueuer) sees the contended counter on and busy loops waiting on it to decrement. However this assumption is wrong. There can be only one CPU to find the lock contended because call_rcu() (the bypass enqueuer) is the only bypass lock acquire site that may not already hold the NOCB lock beforehand, all the other sites must first contend on the NOCB lock. Therefore step 2) is impossible. The other problem is that the mitigation assumes that contenders all belong to the same rdp CPU, which is also impossible for a raw spinlock. In theory the warning could trigger if the enqueuer holds the bypass lock and another CPU flushes the bypass queue concurrently but this is prevented from all flush users: 1) NOCB kthreads only flush if they successfully _tried_ to lock the bypass lock. So no contention management here. 2) Flush on callbacks migration happen remotely when the CPU is offline. No concurrency against bypass enqueue. 3) Flush on deoffloading happen either locally with IRQs disabled or remotely when the CPU is not yet online. No concurrency against bypass enqueue. 4) Flush on barrier entrain happen either locally with IRQs disabled or remotely when the CPU is offline. No concurrency against bypass enqueue. For those reasons, the bypass lock contention mitigation isn't needed and is even wrong. Remove it but keep the warning reporting a contended bypass lock on a remote CPU, to keep unexpected contention awareness. Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
fixes.2024.04.15a: RCU fixes misc.2024.04.12a: Miscellaneous fixes rcu-sync-normal-improve.2024.04.15a: Improving synchronize_rcu() call rcu-tasks.2024.04.15a: Tasks RCU updates rcutorture.2024.04.15a: Torture-test updates
This patch introduces a small enhancement which allows to do a direct wake-up of synchronize_rcu() callers. It occurs after a completion of grace period, thus by the gp-kthread. Number of clients is limited by the hard-coded maximum allowed threshold. The remaining part, if still exists is deferred to a main worker. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Zd0ZtNu+Rt0qXkfS@lothringen/ Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
Currently, there are rcu_data structure fields named ->rcu_onl_gp_seq and ->rcu_ofl_gp_seq that track the rcu_state.gp_flags field at the time of the corresponding CPU's last online or offline operation, respectively. However, this information is not particularly useful. It would be better to instead track the grace period state kept in rcu_state.gp_state. This would also be consistent with the initialization in rcu_boot_init_percpu_data(), which is to RCU_GP_CLEANED (an rcu_state.gp_state value), and also with the diagnostics in rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(), whose format is consistent with an integer, not a bitmask. This commit therefore makes this change and changes the names to ->rcu_onl_gp_flags and ->rcu_ofl_gp_flags, respectively. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
The synchronize_rcu() call is going to be reworked, thus this patch adds dedicated fields into the rcu_state structure. Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
TREE04 running on short iterations can produce writer stalls of the
following kind:
??? Writer stall state RTWS_EXP_SYNC(4) g3968 f0x0 ->state 0x2 cpu 0
task:rcu_torture_wri state:D stack:14568 pid:83 ppid:2 flags:0x00004000
Call Trace:
<TASK>
__schedule+0x2de/0x850
? trace_event_raw_event_rcu_exp_funnel_lock+0x6d/0xb0
schedule+0x4f/0x90
synchronize_rcu_expedited+0x430/0x670
? __pfx_autoremove_wake_function+0x10/0x10
? __pfx_synchronize_rcu_expedited+0x10/0x10
do_rtws_sync.constprop.0+0xde/0x230
rcu_torture_writer+0x4b4/0xcd0
? __pfx_rcu_torture_writer+0x10/0x10
kthread+0xc7/0xf0
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork+0x2f/0x50
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
</TASK>
Waiting for an expedited grace period and polling for an expedited
grace period both are operations that internally rely on the same
workqueue performing necessary asynchronous work.
However, a dependency chain is involved between those two operations,
as depicted below:
====== CPU 0 ======= ====== CPU 1 =======
synchronize_rcu_expedited()
exp_funnel_lock()
mutex_lock(&rcu_state.exp_mutex);
start_poll_synchronize_rcu_expedited
queue_work(rcu_gp_wq, &rnp->exp_poll_wq);
synchronize_rcu_expedited_queue_work()
queue_work(rcu_gp_wq, &rew->rew_work);
wait_event() // A, wait for &rew->rew_work completion
mutex_unlock() // B
//======> switch to kworker
sync_rcu_do_polled_gp() {
synchronize_rcu_expedited()
exp_funnel_lock()
mutex_lock(&rcu_state.exp_mutex); // C, wait B
....
} // D
Since workqueues are usually implemented on top of several kworkers
handling the queue concurrently, the above situation wouldn't deadlock
most of the time because A then doesn't depend on D. But in case of
memory stress, a single kworker may end up handling alone all the works
in a serialized way. In that case the above layout becomes a problem
because A then waits for D, closing a circular dependency:
A -> D -> C -> B -> A
This however only happens when CONFIG_RCU_EXP_KTHREAD=n. Indeed
synchronize_rcu_expedited() is otherwise implemented on top of a kthread
worker while polling still relies on rcu_gp_wq workqueue, breaking the
above circular dependency chain.
Fix this with making expedited grace period to always rely on kthread
worker. The workqueue based implementation is essentially a duplicate
anyway now that the per-node initialization is performed by per-node
kthread workers.
Meanwhile the CONFIG_RCU_EXP_KTHREAD switch is still kept around to
manage the scheduler policy of these kthread workers.
Reported-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Suggested-by: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Neeraj upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
When CONFIG_RCU_EXP_KTHREAD=n, the expedited grace period per node initialization is performed in parallel via workqueues (one work per node). However in CONFIG_RCU_EXP_KTHREAD=y, this per node initialization is performed by a single kworker serializing each node initialization (one work for all nodes). The second part is certainly less scalable and efficient beyond a single leaf node. To improve this, expand this single kworker into per-node kworkers. This new layout is eventually intended to remove the workqueues based implementation since it will essentially now become duplicate code. Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>