On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 4:02 AM Frederic Weisbecker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Le Sun, Oct 01, 2023 at 07:57:14AM +0530, Neeraj upadhyay a écrit :
> >
> > But "more" only checks for CBs in DONE tail. The callbacks which have been
> > just
> > accelerated are not advanced to DONE tail.
> >
> > Having said above, I am still trying to figure out, which callbacks
> > are actually being pointed
> > by NEXT tail. Given that __call_srcu() already does a advance and
> > accelerate, all enqueued
> > callbacks would be in either WAIT tail (the callbacks for current
> > active GP) or NEXT_READY
> > tail (the callbacks for next GP after current one completes). So, they
> > should already have
> > GP num assigned and srcu_invoke_callbacks() won't accelerate them.
> > Only case I can
> > think of is, if current GP completes after we sample
> > rcu_seq_current(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq) for
> > rcu_segcblist_advance() (so, WAIT tail cbs are not moved to DONE tail)
> > and a new GP is started
> > before we take snapshot ('s') of next GP for
> > rcu_segcblist_accelerate(), then the gp num 's'
> > > gp num of NEXT_READY_TAIL and will be put in NEXT tail. Not sure
> > if my understanding is correct here. Thoughts?
> >
> > __call_srcu()
> > rcu_segcblist_advance(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
> > rcu_seq_current(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq));
> > s = rcu_seq_snap(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq);
> > (void)rcu_segcblist_accelerate(&sdp->srcu_cblist, s);
>
> Good point! This looks plausible.
>
> Does the (buggy) acceleration in srcu_invoke_callbacks() exists solely
> to handle that case? Because then the acceleration could be moved before
> the advance on callbacks handling, something like:
>
I think we might need to accelerate after advance, as the tail pointers
(WAIT, NEXT_READY) can be non-empty and we will not be able to
accelerate (and assign GP num) until we advance WAIT tail to DONE tail?
Thanks
Neeraj
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> index 20d7a238d675..af9d8af1d321 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> @@ -1245,6 +1245,11 @@ static unsigned long srcu_gp_start_if_needed(struct
> srcu_struct *ssp,
> rcu_segcblist_advance(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
> rcu_seq_current(&ssp->srcu_sup->srcu_gp_seq));
> s = rcu_seq_snap(&ssp->srcu_sup->srcu_gp_seq);
> + /*
> + * Acceleration might fail if the preceding call to
> + * rcu_segcblist_advance() also failed due to a prior incomplete grace
> + * period. This should be later fixed in srcu_invoke_callbacks().
> + */
> (void)rcu_segcblist_accelerate(&sdp->srcu_cblist, s);
> if (ULONG_CMP_LT(sdp->srcu_gp_seq_needed, s)) {
> sdp->srcu_gp_seq_needed = s;
> @@ -1692,6 +1697,13 @@ static void srcu_invoke_callbacks(struct work_struct
> *work)
> ssp = sdp->ssp;
> rcu_cblist_init(&ready_cbs);
> spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(sdp);
> + /*
> + * Acceleration might have failed in srcu_gp_start_if_needed() if
> + * the preceding call to rcu_segcblist_advance() also failed due to
> + * a prior incomplete grace period.
> + */
> + (void)rcu_segcblist_accelerate(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
> + sdp->srcu_gp_seq_needed);
> rcu_segcblist_advance(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
> rcu_seq_current(&ssp->srcu_sup->srcu_gp_seq));
> if (sdp->srcu_cblist_invoking ||
> @@ -1720,8 +1732,6 @@ static void srcu_invoke_callbacks(struct work_struct
> *work)
> */
> spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(sdp);
> rcu_segcblist_add_len(&sdp->srcu_cblist, -len);
> - (void)rcu_segcblist_accelerate(&sdp->srcu_cblist,
> -
> rcu_seq_snap(&ssp->srcu_sup->srcu_gp_seq));
> sdp->srcu_cblist_invoking = false;
> more = rcu_segcblist_ready_cbs(&sdp->srcu_cblist);
> spin_unlock_irq_rcu_node(sdp);
>
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Neeraj
> >
> >
> > > if (more) {
> > > srcu_schedule_cbs_sdp(sdp, 0);
> > > }
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > - Joel
