Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:29:49 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@fb.com, mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
        dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
        oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/17] rcu/tree: Skip entry into the page
 allocator for PREEMPT_RT
Message-ID: <20200706202949.GB233429@google.com>
References: <20200624201200.GA28901@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
 <20200624201226.21197-3-paulmck@kernel.org>
 <20200630164543.4mdcf6zb4zfclhln@linutronix.de>
 <20200630183534.GG9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
 <20200702141216.r4rbt5w3hjzafpgg@linutronix.de>
 <20200702194506.GA31478@pc636>
 <20200706194232.GA233429@google.com>
 <20200706195557.GA24082@pc636>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200706195557.GA24082@pc636>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:55:57PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
[...]
> > > Another way of fixing it is just dropping the lock letting the page
> > > allocator to do an allocation without our "upper/local" lock. I did a
> > > proposal like that once upon a time, so maybe it is a time to highlight
> > > it again:
> > > <snip>
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > index 21c2fa5bd8c3..249f10a89bb9 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > > @@ -3278,9 +3278,11 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
> > >  }
> > > 
> > >  static inline bool
> > > -kvfree_call_rcu_add_ptr_to_bulk(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp, void *ptr)
> > > +kvfree_call_rcu_add_ptr_to_bulk(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp,
> > > +       void *ptr, unsigned long *flags)
> > >  {
> > >         struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *bnode;
> > > +       struct kfree_rcu_cpu *tmp;
> > >         int idx;
> > > 
> > >         if (unlikely(!krcp->initialized))
> > > @@ -3306,6 +3308,9 @@ kvfree_call_rcu_add_ptr_to_bulk(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp, void *ptr)
> > >                         if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> > >                                 return false;
> > > 
> > > +                       migrate_disable();
> > > +                       krc_this_cpu_unlock(krcp, *flags);
> > 
> > If I remember, the issue here is that migrate_disable is not implemented on a
> > non-RT kernel due to issues with starvation.
> > 
> It is implemented. Please have a look linux/preempt.h for regular kernel.

Yeah sorry, I meant it is not implemented in the right way in the sense - it
disables migration with the preempt-disable hammer.

Anyway, I think as we discussed on IRC, your proposal will work for both
kernels while allowing us to keep the internal lock as raw.

thanks,

 - Joel