Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 rcu/dev 1/2] rcu: Track laziness during boot and suspend
Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:25:51 -0500
Message-Id: <E588EAC4-D8F2-4893-A668-816C0C7104B2@joelfernandes.org>
References: <20230112192724.GA3610129@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        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>,
        fweisbec@gmail.com, urezki@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <20230112192724.GA3610129@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
To:     paulmck@kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> On Jan 12, 2023, at 2:27 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:52:22AM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google)=
 wrote:
>> During boot and suspend/resume, it is desired to prevent RCU laziness fro=
m
>> effecting performance and in some cases failures like with suspend.
>>=20
>> Track whether RCU laziness is to be ignored or not, in kernels with
>> CONFIG_RCU_LAZY enabled. We do such tracking for expedited-RCU already, h=
owever
>> since Android currently expedites synchronous_rcu() always, we cannot rel=
y on
>> that. The next patch ignores laziness hints based on this tracking.
>>=20
>> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
>> ---
>> Paul, could we take this and the next one for 6.2 -rc cycle?
>>=20
>> I also booted debian Linux and verified the flag is reset correctly after=
 boot
>> completes. Thanks.
>=20
> After going back and forth a bit, I took these two as-is (aside from
> the usual commit-log wordsmithing).
>=20
> At some point, the state-change-notification from things like boot,
> suspend/resume, sysrq-t, and panic() should probably be refactored.
> But I do not believe that we are yet at that point, and there is not
> much point in half-refactorings in cases such as this one.
>=20
> I added the Fixes tags, and, if testing goes well, I plan to submit
> them into the upcoming merge window.  I have no reason to believe that
> anyone is hitting this, it is only a few weeks away anyhow, and a good
> chunk of that would be consumed by testing and review.
>=20
> And if someone does hit it, we do have your fixes to send to them, so
> thank you for that!
> (These won't become visible on -rcu until I complete today's rebase,
> in case you were wondering.)

Thanks and this sounds good to me. Meanwhile I pulled into our product kerne=
l so all is good.

Thanks,

 - Joel


>=20
>                        Thanx, Paul
>=20
>> kernel/rcu/rcu.h    |  6 ++++++
>> kernel/rcu/tree.c   |  2 ++
>> kernel/rcu/update.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 5 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> create mode 100644 cc_list
>> create mode 100644 to_list
>>=20
>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
>> index 5c8013f7085f..115616ac3bfa 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
>> @@ -449,14 +449,20 @@ do {                                    \
>> /* Tiny RCU doesn't expedite, as its purpose in life is instead to be tin=
y. */
>> static inline bool rcu_gp_is_normal(void) { return true; }
>> static inline bool rcu_gp_is_expedited(void) { return false; }
>> +static inline bool rcu_async_should_hurry(void) { return false; }
>> static inline void rcu_expedite_gp(void) { }
>> static inline void rcu_unexpedite_gp(void) { }
>> +static inline void rcu_async_hurry(void) { }
>> +static inline void rcu_async_relax(void) { }
>> static inline void rcu_request_urgent_qs_task(struct task_struct *t) { }
>> #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TINY_RCU */
>> bool rcu_gp_is_normal(void);     /* Internal RCU use. */
>> bool rcu_gp_is_expedited(void);  /* Internal RCU use. */
>> +bool rcu_async_should_hurry(void);  /* Internal RCU use. */
>> void rcu_expedite_gp(void);
>> void rcu_unexpedite_gp(void);
>> +void rcu_async_hurry(void);
>> +void rcu_async_relax(void);
>> void rcupdate_announce_bootup_oddness(void);
>> #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU_GENERIC
>> void show_rcu_tasks_gp_kthreads(void);
>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>> index 63545d79da51..78b2e999c904 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
>> @@ -4504,11 +4504,13 @@ static int rcu_pm_notify(struct notifier_block *s=
elf,
>>    switch (action) {
>>    case PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE:
>>    case PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE:
>> +        rcu_async_hurry();
>>        rcu_expedite_gp();
>>        break;
>>    case PM_POST_HIBERNATION:
>>    case PM_POST_SUSPEND:
>>        rcu_unexpedite_gp();
>> +        rcu_async_relax();
>>        break;
>>    default:
>>        break;
>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/update.c b/kernel/rcu/update.c
>> index 3893022f8ed8..19bf6fa3ee6a 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rcu/update.c
>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/update.c
>> @@ -144,8 +144,45 @@ bool rcu_gp_is_normal(void)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_gp_is_normal);
>>=20
>> -static atomic_t rcu_expedited_nesting =3D ATOMIC_INIT(1);
>> +static atomic_t rcu_async_hurry_nesting =3D ATOMIC_INIT(1);
>> +/*
>> + * Should call_rcu() callbacks be processed with urgency or are
>> + * they OK being executed with arbitrary delays?
>> + */
>> +bool rcu_async_should_hurry(void)
>> +{
>> +    return !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_LAZY) ||
>> +           atomic_read(&rcu_async_hurry_nesting);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_async_should_hurry);
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * rcu_async_hurry - Make future async RCU callbacks not lazy.
>> + *
>> + * After a call to this function, future calls to call_rcu()
>> + * will be processed in a timely fashion.
>> + */
>> +void rcu_async_hurry(void)
>> +{
>> +    if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_LAZY))
>> +        atomic_inc(&rcu_async_hurry_nesting);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_async_hurry);
>>=20
>> +/**
>> + * rcu_async_relax - Make future async RCU callbacks lazy.
>> + *
>> + * After a call to this function, future calls to call_rcu()
>> + * will be processed in a lazy fashion.
>> + */
>> +void rcu_async_relax(void)
>> +{
>> +    if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_LAZY))
>> +        atomic_dec(&rcu_async_hurry_nesting);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_async_relax);
>> +
>> +static atomic_t rcu_expedited_nesting =3D ATOMIC_INIT(1);
>> /*
>>  * Should normal grace-period primitives be expedited?  Intended for
>>  * use within RCU.  Note that this function takes the rcu_expedited
>> @@ -195,6 +232,7 @@ static bool rcu_boot_ended __read_mostly;
>> void rcu_end_inkernel_boot(void)
>> {
>>    rcu_unexpedite_gp();
>> +    rcu_async_relax();
>>    if (rcu_normal_after_boot)
>>        WRITE_ONCE(rcu_normal, 1);
>>    rcu_boot_ended =3D true;
>> --=20
>> 2.39.0.314.g84b9a713c41-goog