Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 5 Jul 2019 08:24:50 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        rcu@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcuperf: Make rcuperf kernel test more robust for
 !expedited mode
Message-ID: <20190705122450.GA82532@google.com>
References: <20190704043431.208689-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <20190704174044.GK26519@linux.ibm.com>
 <20190705035231.GA31088@X58A-UD3R>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190705035231.GA31088@X58A-UD3R>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 12:52:31PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 10:40:44AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 12:34:30AM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > > It is possible that the rcuperf kernel test runs concurrently with init
> > > starting up.  During this time, the system is running all grace periods
> > > as expedited.  However, rcuperf can also be run for normal GP tests.
> > > Right now, it depends on a holdoff time before starting the test to
> > > ensure grace periods start later. This works fine with the default
> > > holdoff time however it is not robust in situations where init takes
> > > greater than the holdoff time to finish running. Or, as in my case:
> > > 
> > > I modified the rcuperf test locally to also run a thread that did
> > > preempt disable/enable in a loop. This had the effect of slowing down
> > > init. The end result was that the "batches:" counter in rcuperf was 0
> > > causing a division by 0 error in the results. This counter was 0 because
> > > only expedited GPs seem to happen, not normal ones which led to the
> > > rcu_state.gp_seq counter remaining constant across grace periods which
> > > unexpectedly happen to be expedited. The system was running expedited
> > > RCU all the time because rcu_unexpedited_gp() would not have run yet
> > > from init.  In other words, the test would concurrently with init
> > > booting in expedited GP mode.
> > > 
> > > To fix this properly, let us check if system_state if SYSTEM_RUNNING
> > > is set before starting the test. The system_state approximately aligns
> 
> Just minor typo..
> 
> To fix this properly, let us check if system_state if SYSTEM_RUNNING
> is set before starting the test. ...
> 
> Should be
> 
> To fix this properly, let us check if system_state is set to
> SYSTEM_RUNNING before starting the test. ...

That's a fair point. I wonder if Paul already fixed it up in his tree,
however I am happy to resend if he hasn't. Paul, how would you like to handle
this commit log nit?

it is just 'if ..' to 'is SYSTEM_RUNNING'