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;
Date:   Sun, 15 Jan 2023 20:26:37 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, 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, fweisbec@gmail.com, urezki@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 rcu/dev 1/2] rcu: Track laziness during boot and
 suspend
Message-ID: <20230116042637.GO2948950@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20230112005223.2329802-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <20230115162504.08ef72b0@rorschach.local.home>
 <CAEXW_YSNurO-hK+q2amP6wa96jr0KkZ_ggF+5x_sTHESC9vpNw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEXW_YSNurO-hK+q2amP6wa96jr0KkZ_ggF+5x_sTHESC9vpNw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 04:34:58PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 4:25 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 00:52:22 +0000
> > "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> >
> > > -- 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);
> > >
> > > -static atomic_t rcu_expedited_nesting = ATOMIC_INIT(1);
> > > +static atomic_t rcu_async_hurry_nesting = 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);
> > >
> >
> > Where do you plan on calling these externally, as they are being
> > marked exported?
> >
> > If you allow random drivers to enable this, I can see something
> > enabling it and hitting an error path that causes it to never disable
> > it.
> 
> You mean, just like rcu_expedite_gp() ?
> 
> > I wouldn't have EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() unless you really know that it is
> > needed externally.
> 
> At the moment it is not called externally but in the future, it could
> be from rcutorture. If you see rcu_expedite_gp(), that is exported
> too. I was just modeling it around that API.

It really should be invoked from rcutorture for testing purposes.
In current -rcu, TREE01 enables LAZY_RCU, so we are finally getting
coverage (aside from my manual enablement on part of the test grid that
I use).

So we need that export.

On the other hand, wasn't there some talk recently of targeted exports?
If that comes to pass, this could be exported to only rcutorture and
rcuscale.

							Thanx, Paul

> thanks,
> 
>  - Joel
> 
> >
> > -- Steve
> >
> >
> > > +/**
> > > + * 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 = ATOMIC_INIT(1);