On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:40:27AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 20:30 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 6 November 2012 16:08, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > This is V2 Resend of my sched_select_cpu() work. Resend because didn't
> > > got much
> > > attention on V2. Including m
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:35:52PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:03 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
>
> > If I understand correctly (though also suffering turkey OD), the idea is
> > to offload work to more energy-efficient CPUs.
>
> This
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:01:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 08:07 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > Those rcu_irq_enter()/rcu_irq_exit() were introduced by commit
> > c5e015d4949aa665 "KVM guest: exit idleness when handling
> > KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT", but now I am starting to qu
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:58:27PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote:
> This patch uses the real new value of dynticks_nesting instead of 0 in
> rcu_eqs_enter_common().
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zhong
Good catch! Queued for 3.9.
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> ke
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:39:59PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/11/27 Li Zhong :
> > I noticed some warnings complaining about dynticks_nesting value, like
> >
> > [ 267.545032] [ cut here ]
> > [ 267.545032] WARNING: at kernel/rcutree.c:382 rcu_eqs_enter+0xab/
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:56:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/11/27 Gleb Natapov :
> > For KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT it behaves like an exception.
>
> Ok.
> There seem to be a bug in kvm_async_pf_task_wait(). Using
> idle_cpu(cpu) to find out if the current task is the idle task
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:48:18PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/11/27 Paul E. McKenney :
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:56:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> 2012/11/27 Gleb Natapov :
> >> > For KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT it behaves l
step to
> shutdown the tick while still accounting the cputime.
I have queued this, and if it passes tests and inspection will try
pushing it for 3.8.
Thanx, Paul
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
> Cc: Andrew Morton
>
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 08:50:38PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 16:59 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:33:25PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Create a new subsystem that probes on kernel boundaries
> > > to ke
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:30:19AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/11/29 Li Zhong :
> > On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:33 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > []
> >> -
> >> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!current->mm);
> >> -
> >> - local_irq_save(flags);
> >> - rdtp = &__get_cpu_var(rcu_dynti
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:47:52PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> With gcc-4.8 I get:
>
> CC kernel/rcutree.o
> kernel/rcutree.c: In function ‘rcu_init_one’:
> kernel/rcutree.c:2850:13: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
> [-Warray-bounds]
> rsp->level[i] = rsp->l
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 06:43:58PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2012.11.29 at 09:02 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:47:52PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > > With gcc-4.8 I get:
> > >
> > > CC kernel/rc
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 07:22:54PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2012.11.29 at 10:10 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 06:43:58PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > > On 2012.11.29 at 09:02 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > >
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 09:03:21PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2012.11.29 at 11:19 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 07:22:54PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > > On 2012.11.29 at 10:10 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > >
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:46:09PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> Old srcu implement requires sp->completed is loaded in
> RCU-sched(preempt_disable()) section.
>
> The new srcu is now not RCU-sched based, it doesn't require the load of
> sp->completed and the access to counter must be in the same
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:06:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c between commit cb57a2b4cff7 ("x86-32: Export
> kernel_stack_pointer() for modules") from Linus' tree and commit
> 98dbec158343 ("co
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 07:30:22PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/15, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 07:34:32PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > 2013/3/15 Oleg Nesterov :
> > > >
> > > > My point was: sho
First attempt at documentation for adaptive ticks.
Thoughts?
Thanx, Paul
nohz1: Documentation
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
diff --git a/Documentation/timers
Hello!
This series contains the following changes to RCU documentation:
1. Make the bugginess of a code sample more apparent with
all-caps comments.
2. RCU documentation update based on review motivated by the
first commit.
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
This commit applies a few updates based on a quick review of the RCU
documentations.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 26 --
Documentation/RCU/lockdep.txt| 5 +
Documentation/RCU/rcub
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
One of the code samples in whatisRCU.txt shows a bug, but someone scanning
the document quickly might mistake it for a valid use of RCU. Add some
screaming comments to help keep speed-readers on track.
Reported-by: Nathan Zimmer
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKen
Hello!
This series contains the following fixes for RCU:
1. Whitespace fix courtesy of Jiang Fang.
2. Avoid raising softirq from CPUs going offline.
3. Remove obsolete CPU-hotplug comment, courtesy of Srivatsa Bhat.
4. Delete unused "wakemask" field.
5. Fix hlist_bl_s
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Offline CPUs transition through the scheduler to the idle loop one
last time before being shut down. This can result in RCU raising
softirq on this CPU, which is at best useless given that the CPU's
callbacks will be offloaded at CPU_DEAD time. This c
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
kernel/rcutree.h | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.h b/kernel/rcutree.h
index c896b50..8e75609 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.h
@@ -134,9 +134,6 @@ struc
From: Jiang Fang
Signed-off-by: Jiang Fang
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
kernel/rcutree.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index 5b8ad82..157539a 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -3171,7
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
In some situations, randomly delaying RCU grace-period initialization
can cause more trouble than help. This commit therefore restricts this
type of RCU self-torture to runtime, giving it a rest during boot and
shutdown.
Reported-by: Sasha Levin
Signed-off-
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
If RCU's softirq handler is prevented from executing, an RCU CPU stall
warning can result. Ways to prevent RCU's softirq handler from executing
include: (1) CPU spinning with interrupts disabled, (2) infinite loop
in some softirq handler, and (3
f-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
kernel/rcutree.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index b2fc234..71df6f9 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -2931,11 +2931,6 @@ static int __cpuinit rcu_cpu_notify(struct
notifier_b
.
Reported by: Abhijith Das
Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse
Tested-by: Abhijith Das
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
include/linux/list_bl.h| 5 +
include/linux/rculist_bl.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/list_bl.h b/include/linux
Hello!
This series contains changes to RCU_FAST_NO_HZ idle entry/exit and also
removes restrictions on no-CBs CPUs.
1. Remove restrictions on no-CBs CPUs.
2. Allow some control of no-CBs CPUs at kernel-build time. The option
of most interest is probably the one that makes -all-
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
If CPUs are to give prior notice of needed grace periods, it will be
necessary to invoke rcu_start_gp() without dropping the root rcu_node
structure's ->lock. This commit takes a first step in this direction
by moving the release of this lock to the e
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
CPUs going idle will need to record the need for a future grace
period, but won't actually need to block waiting on it. This commit
therefore splits rcu_start_future_gp(), which does the recording, from
rcu_nocb_wait_gp(), which now invokes rcu_start_fu
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
CPUs going idle need to be able to indicate their need for future grace
periods. A mechanism for doing this already exists for no-callbacks
CPUs, so the idea is to re-use that mechanism. This commit therefore
moves the ->n_nocb_gp_requests field of
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Dyntick-idle CPUs need to be able to pre-announce their need for grace
periods. This can be done using something similar to the mechanism used
by no-CB CPUs to announce their need for grace periods. This commit
moves in this direction by renaming the no
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Now that callback acceleration is idempotent, it is safe to accelerate
callbacks during grace-period cleanup on any CPUs that the kthread happens
to be running on. This commit therefore propagates the completion
of the grace period to the per-CPU data struc
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
include/trace/events/rcu.h | 55 ++
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h| 30 +
2 files changed, 85 insertions(+)
diff --git a/inc
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Now that rcu_start_future_gp() has been abstracted from
rcu_nocb_wait_gp(), rcu_accelerate_cbs() can invoke rcu_start_future_gp()
so as to register the need for any future grace periods needed by a
CPU about to enter dyntick-idle mode. This commit makes t
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
If CPUs are to give prior notice of needed grace periods, it will be
necessary to invoke rcu_start_gp() without dropping the root rcu_node
structure's ->lock. This commit takes a second step in this direction
by moving the release of this lock t
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Currently, the no-CBs kthreads do repeated timed waits for grace periods
to elapse. This is crude and energy inefficient, so this commit allows
no-CBs kthreads to specify exactly which grace period they are waiting
for and also allows them to block for
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
RCU_FAST_NO_HZ operation is controlled by four compile-time C-preprocessor
macros, but some use cases benefit greatly from runtime adjustment,
particularly when tuning devices. This commit therefore creates the
corresponding sysfs entries.
Reported-by: Robi
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Because RCU callbacks are now associated with the number of the grace
period that they must wait for, CPUs can now take advance callbacks
corresponding to grace periods that ended while a given CPU was in
dyntick-idle mode. This eliminates the need to try f
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Currently, CPU 0 is constrained to not be a no-CBs CPU, and furthermore
at least one no-CBs CPU must remain online at any given time. These
restrictions are problematic in some situations, such as cases where
all CPUs must run a real-time workload that n
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Currently, the only way to specify no-CBs CPUs is via the rcu_nocbs
kernel command-line parameter. This is inconvenient in some cases,
particularly for randconfig testing, so this commit adds a new set of
kernel configuration parameters. CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Currently, the per-no-CBs-CPU kthreads are named "rcuo" followed by
the CPU number, for example, "rcuo". This is problematic given that
there are either two or three RCU flavors, each of which gets a per-CPU
kthread with exactly the sam
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
---
kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 7 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index 90a1914..7225a5a 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plug
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:48:31PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/3/18 Rob Landley :
> > On 03/18/2013 01:46:32 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
[ . . . ]
> >> >> +o At least one CPU must keep the scheduling-clock interrupt going
> >> >> + in order to support accurate timekeepi
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:32:18PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 15:25 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > NO_HZ: Reducing Scheduling-Clock Ticks
>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:27:11PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [ Added Arjan in case he as anything to add about the idle=poll below ]
Good point!
> On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 16:55 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:32:18PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git rcu/urgent
Thanx, Paul
Paul E. McKenney (1):
list: Fix double fetch of pointer in hlist_entry_safe()
include/linux
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 07:42:03AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > [Reposting with corrected subject line.]
> >
> > Hello, Ingo,
> >
> > This series contains a single commit that fixes
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:16:50AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:22:59PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > The "full_nohz=" boot parameter specifies which CPUs are to be
> > > > > > adaptive-ticks CPU
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:00:17PM +0800, Jiang Fang wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiang Fang
Queued for 3.10, thank you!
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> kernel/rcutree.c |2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kerne
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 07:07:57PM +, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
>
> Abhi noticed that we were getting a complaint from the RCU subsystem
> about access of an RCU protected list under the write side bit lock.
> This patch adds additional annotation to check both the RCU read
> lock and the write
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 10:52:21AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> The rcu torture test uses trace_clock, and requires that it be built
> into the kernel. If it is not, then we get the following build error:
>
> ERROR: "trace_clock_local" [kernel/rcutorture.ko] undefined!
>
> Reported-by: Tetsuo H
ommon
rcu: Remove unused code originally used for context tracking
Paul E. McKenney (11):
tracing: Export trace_clock_local()
rcu: Reduce rcutorture tracing
rcu: Fix blimit type for trace_rcu_batch_start()
rcu: Silence compiler array out-of-bounds false positive
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 01:36:13PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 08:59 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 10:52:21AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > The rcu torture test uses trace_clock, and requires that it be built
> >
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:30:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Btw., I'm now getting these build errors in -tip too:
>
> kernel/built-in.o: In function `rcu_torture_reader':
> rcutorture.c:(.text+0x657d7): undefined reference to `trace_clock_local'
> kernel/built-in.o: In function `rcu_tortu
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 12:25:23PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:30:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Btw., I'm now getting these build errors in -tip too:
> >
> > kernel/built-in.o: In function `rcu_torture_reader&#x
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 02:52:30PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 06:11 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > Steven Rostedt (1):
> > rcu: Allow rcutorture to be built at low optimization levels
>
> I wish git had dual (or more) authorship, as I
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:12:00AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 12:10 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > I'll reply to this as I come up with comments.
> > >
> > > First thing is, don't call it NO_HZ_FULL. A better name would
> > > be NO_HZ_C
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:06:21PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 08:30 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > I suspect that removal of jiffies from the kernel will take a few stages,
> > with RCU being one of the laggards for awhile. Making RCU's s
ch 4/8 is incomplete,
though a good step towards allowing SRCU to be invoked from offline CPUs.
Thoughts on getting the rest of the way there?
Thanx, Paul
> Thanks,
> lai
>
> On 05/02/13 01:18, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >He
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 03:13:30PM -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> Introduce queue spinlocks, to be used in situations where it is desired
> to have good throughput even under the occasional high-contention situation.
>
> This initial implementation is based on the classic MCS spinlock,
> becaus
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 02:56:49PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 14:34 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 03:13:30PM -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > > Introduce queue spinlocks, to be used in situations where it is desired
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:03:54PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 15:58 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
> > No, I think that's doable. The trick would be that once a thread
> > acquires the lock, the only remaining use of the node is to receive
> > the 'next' pointer if/when
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 07:48:33PM -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:03:54PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> It adds yet another memory write to store the node pointer in the
> >&g
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 08:36:43PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 07:48:33PM -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 04:03:54PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
&g
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 09:11:14PM -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > Right... For spinlocks that -don't- disable irqs, you need to deal with
> > the possibility that a CPU gets interrupted while spinning, and th
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 01:38:29AM +, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 at 19:32 GMT, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I got the following while fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest:
> >
> > [ 51.680236] ===
> > [ 51.681914] [ INFO: suspicio
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:12:37PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:00:04 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > On 01/24/2013 01:27 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 01:03:52AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> >>> CPU 0 CPU 1
> >>>
> >>> read
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:03:53PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Using global rwlocks as the backend for per-CPU rwlocks helps us avoid many
> lock-ordering related problems (unlike per-cpu locks). However, global
> rwlocks lead to unnecessary cache-line bouncing even when there are no
> writers
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:04:11PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> If interrupt handlers can also be readers, then one of the ways to make
> per-CPU rwlocks safe, is to disable interrupts at the reader side before
> trying to acquire the per-CPU rwlock and keep it disabled throughout the
> duratio
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:04:23PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> CPU hotplug (which will be the first user of per-CPU rwlocks) has a special
> requirement with respect to locking: the writer, after acquiring the per-CPU
> rwlock for write, must be allowed to take the same lock for read, without
S. Miller"
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin"
> Cc: x...@kernel.org
> Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: uclinux-dist-de...@blackfin.uclinux.org
> Cc: linux-i...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-m...@linux-mips.org
> Cc: linux-am33-l...@redhat.com
> Cc: linux-par.
n the CPU hotplug code to static inline C functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
>
> include/linux/cpu.h |8
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpu.h b/include/li
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:05:10PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to
> depend on preempt_disable() to prevent CPUs from going offline from under us.
>
> Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic() APIs to prevent CPUs from going of
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:15:22PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> ... and also cleanup a comment that refers to CPU hotplug being dependent on
> stop_machine().
>
> Cc: David Howells
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
(Hey, I thought I owed mys
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:06:34PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Don't refer to stop_machine() in the CPU hotplug path, since we are going
> to get rid of it. Also, move the comment referring to callback adoption
> to the CPU_DEAD case, because that's where it happens now.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sr
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:11PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> The current CPU hotplug implementation has become an increasing
> nightmare full of races and undocumented behaviour. The main issue of
> the current hotplug scheme is the completely asymetric
> startup/teardown process. The hotplug
per cpu thread to be excluded from automatic parking, so it
> can park itself once it's done
>
> Add a create callback function as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> include/linux/smpboot.h |5 +
> kernel/smpboot.c
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:13PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> To allow the stopper thread being managed by the smpboot thread
> infrastructure separate out the task storage from the stopper data
> structure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:14PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Use the smpboot thread infrastructure. Mark the stopper thread
> selfparking and park it after it has finished the take_cpu_down()
> work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
One grammar nit, other than that:
Revi
> Reflect this in the documentation.
>
> Cc: Rob Landley
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
>
> Documentation/cpu-hotplug.txt | 17 +++--
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletion
d let the users interested deal with it w/o
> imposing that extra state checks on everyone.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Getting rid of all the _FROZEN variants of the notifier actions would
be good!
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
>
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:15PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Split out into separate functions, so we can convert it to a state machine.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> kern
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:16PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Split cpu_down in separate functions in preparation for state machine
> conversion.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> k
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:56AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 02/09/2013 04:40 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:03:53PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> >> Using global rwlocks as the backend for per-CPU rwlocks helps us avoid many
> >
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:06:07PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/08, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > > +static inline void sync_reader(struct percpu_rwlock *pcpu_rwlock,
> > > +unsigned int cpu)
> > > +{
> > > + s
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:11:29AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 02/09/2013 05:37 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:05:10PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> >> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to
> &g
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:39:24AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 01:20 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/11, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> >>
> >> On 02/10/2013 11:36 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > +static void announce_writer_inactive(struct percpu_rwlock *pcpu_rwlock)
> > +{
>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:53:41PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 05:28 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On 8 February 2013 19:09, Srivatsa S. Bhat
> > wrote:
[ . . . ]
> >> Adding Vincent to CC, who had previously evaluated the performance and
> >> latency implications of CPU hotp
-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> include/linux/cpu.h|4 +
> include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 16
> init/main.c| 15 ---
> kernel/cpu.c | 180
> -
> kernel/sm
he
> control processor and the hotplugged processor, so we can move the
> various architecture implementations of the synchronizations to the
> core.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> include/linux/cpuhotplug.h |4 ++
>
t
> run them during the bringup of the non boot cpus because the smp
> scheduler is setup after that. It would be nice if we just could
> compile them in, but that needs a larger surgery to the scheduler code
> and is beyond the scope of this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixn
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:38PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Do we really need so many states here ?
Well, all that RCU does for CPU_DYING is to do tracing, which could be
ditched. Required changes called out inline below.
All that the CPU_ONLINE and CPU_DOWN_PREPARE notifiers do is set
up
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:54:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:06:07PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 02/08, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
> > > > +static inline void sync_reader(str
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 04:01:01PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11:38PM -, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Do we really need so many states here ?
>
> Well, all that RCU does for CPU_DYING is to do tracing, which could be
> ditched. Required
Hello, Ingo,
This series contains SRCU changes for 3.9. These include debugging aids,
updates that move towards the goal of permitting srcu_read_lock() and
srcu_read_unlock() to be used from idle and offline CPUs, and a few small
fixes. These commits are available in the git repository at:
gi
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:43:30PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 12-02-13 10:10:02, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:54:19AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 11-02-13 17:39:43, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:27:56PM +0100, Michal Hocko wr
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:25:26PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 08:10:51AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:43:30PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 12-02-13 10:10:02, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > On T
1 - 100 of 12324 matches
Mail list logo
