forked from Minki/linux
rcu: refactor RCU's context-switch handling
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>
This commit is contained in:
parent
99652b54de
commit
25502a6c13
@ -29,6 +29,10 @@
|
||||
|
||||
void rcu_sched_qs(int cpu);
|
||||
void rcu_bh_qs(int cpu);
|
||||
static inline void rcu_note_context_switch(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
rcu_sched_qs(cpu);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#define __rcu_read_lock() preempt_disable()
|
||||
#define __rcu_read_unlock() preempt_enable()
|
||||
|
@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct notifier_block;
|
||||
|
||||
extern void rcu_sched_qs(int cpu);
|
||||
extern void rcu_bh_qs(int cpu);
|
||||
extern void rcu_note_context_switch(int cpu);
|
||||
extern int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu);
|
||||
extern int rcu_expedited_torture_stats(char *page);
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -97,25 +97,32 @@ static int rcu_gp_in_progress(struct rcu_state *rsp)
|
||||
*/
|
||||
void rcu_sched_qs(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct rcu_data *rdp;
|
||||
struct rcu_data *rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_sched_data, cpu);
|
||||
|
||||
rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_sched_data, cpu);
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc_completed = rdp->gpnum - 1;
|
||||
barrier();
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc = 1;
|
||||
rcu_preempt_note_context_switch(cpu);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void rcu_bh_qs(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct rcu_data *rdp;
|
||||
struct rcu_data *rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_bh_data, cpu);
|
||||
|
||||
rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_bh_data, cpu);
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc_completed = rdp->gpnum - 1;
|
||||
barrier();
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc = 1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Note a context switch. This is a quiescent state for RCU-sched,
|
||||
* and requires special handling for preemptible RCU.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
void rcu_note_context_switch(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
rcu_sched_qs(cpu);
|
||||
rcu_preempt_note_context_switch(cpu);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ
|
||||
DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct rcu_dynticks, rcu_dynticks) = {
|
||||
.dynticks_nesting = 1,
|
||||
|
@ -75,13 +75,19 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_force_quiescent_state);
|
||||
* that this just means that the task currently running on the CPU is
|
||||
* not in a quiescent state. There might be any number of tasks blocked
|
||||
* while in an RCU read-side critical section.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Unlike the other rcu_*_qs() functions, callers to this function
|
||||
* must disable irqs in order to protect the assignment to
|
||||
* ->rcu_read_unlock_special.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static void rcu_preempt_qs(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct rcu_data *rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_preempt_data, cpu);
|
||||
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc_completed = rdp->gpnum - 1;
|
||||
barrier();
|
||||
rdp->passed_quiesc = 1;
|
||||
current->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
@ -144,9 +150,8 @@ static void rcu_preempt_note_context_switch(int cpu)
|
||||
* grace period, then the fact that the task has been enqueued
|
||||
* means that we continue to block the current grace period.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
rcu_preempt_qs(cpu);
|
||||
local_irq_save(flags);
|
||||
t->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS;
|
||||
rcu_preempt_qs(cpu);
|
||||
local_irq_restore(flags);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -236,7 +241,6 @@ static void rcu_read_unlock_special(struct task_struct *t)
|
||||
*/
|
||||
special = t->rcu_read_unlock_special;
|
||||
if (special & RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS) {
|
||||
t->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS;
|
||||
rcu_preempt_qs(smp_processor_id());
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -473,7 +477,6 @@ static void rcu_preempt_check_callbacks(int cpu)
|
||||
struct task_struct *t = current;
|
||||
|
||||
if (t->rcu_read_lock_nesting == 0) {
|
||||
t->rcu_read_unlock_special &= ~RCU_READ_UNLOCK_NEED_QS;
|
||||
rcu_preempt_qs(cpu);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -3706,7 +3706,7 @@ need_resched:
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
cpu = smp_processor_id();
|
||||
rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
|
||||
rcu_sched_qs(cpu);
|
||||
rcu_note_context_switch(cpu);
|
||||
prev = rq->curr;
|
||||
switch_count = &prev->nivcsw;
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -716,7 +716,7 @@ static int run_ksoftirqd(void * __bind_cpu)
|
||||
preempt_enable_no_resched();
|
||||
cond_resched();
|
||||
preempt_disable();
|
||||
rcu_sched_qs((long)__bind_cpu);
|
||||
rcu_note_context_switch((long)__bind_cpu);
|
||||
}
|
||||
preempt_enable();
|
||||
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user