From: Paul E. McKenney Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 06:06:14 +0000 (-0700) Subject: rcu: Delay rcu_barrier() wait until beginning of next CPU-hotunplug operation. X-Git-Tag: v2.6.32-rc1~724^2~18 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=1423cc033df017c762a9155eec470da77a460141;p=profile%2Fivi%2Fkernel-adaptation-intel-automotive.git rcu: Delay rcu_barrier() wait until beginning of next CPU-hotunplug operation. Ingo Molnar reported this lockup: [ 200.380003] Hangcheck: hangcheck value past margin! [ 248.192003] INFO: task S99local:2974 blocked for more than 120 seconds. [ 248.194532] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. [ 248.202330] S99local D 0000000c 6256 2974 2687 0x00000000 [ 248.208929] 9c7ebe90 00000086 6b67ef8b 0000000c 9f25a610 81a69869 00000001 820b6990 [ 248.216123] 820b6990 820b6990 9c6e4c20 9c6e4eb4 82c78990 00000000 6b993559 0000000c [ 248.220616] 9c7ebe90 8105f22a 9c6e4eb4 9c6e4c20 00000001 9c7ebe98 9c7ebeb4 81a65cb3 [ 248.229990] Call Trace: [ 248.234049] [<81a69869>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x22/0x37 [ 248.239769] [<8105f22a>] ? prepare_to_wait+0x48/0x4e [ 248.244796] [<81a65cb3>] rcu_barrier_cpu_hotplug+0xaa/0xc9 [ 248.250343] [<8105f029>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x38 [ 248.256063] [<81062cf2>] notifier_call_chain+0x49/0x71 [ 248.261263] [<81062da0>] raw_notifier_call_chain+0x11/0x13 [ 248.266809] [<81a0b475>] _cpu_down+0x272/0x288 [ 248.271316] [<81a0b4d5>] cpu_down+0x4a/0xa2 [ 248.275563] [<81a0c48a>] store_online+0x2a/0x5e [ 248.280156] [<81a0c460>] ? store_online+0x0/0x5e [ 248.284836] [<814ddc35>] sysdev_store+0x20/0x28 [ 248.289429] [<8112e403>] sysfs_write_file+0xb8/0xe3 [ 248.294369] [<8112e34b>] ? sysfs_write_file+0x0/0xe3 [ 248.299396] [<810e4c8f>] vfs_write+0x91/0x120 [ 248.303817] [<810e4dc1>] sys_write+0x40/0x65 [ 248.308150] [<81002d73>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x28 This change moves an RCU grace period delay off of the critical path for CPU-hotunplug operations. Since RCU callback migration is only performed on CPU-hotunplug operations, and since the rcu_barrier() race is provoked only by consecutive CPU-hotunplug operations, it is not necessary to delay the end of a given CPU-hotunplug operation. We can instead choose to delay the beginning of the next CPU-hotunplug operation. Reported-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Josh Triplett Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca Cc: dvhltc@us.ibm.com Cc: niv@us.ibm.com Cc: peterz@infradead.org Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org Cc: hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org LKML-Reference: <20090819060614.GA14383@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- diff --git a/kernel/rcupdate.c b/kernel/rcupdate.c index 8df1156..bd5d5c8 100644 --- a/kernel/rcupdate.c +++ b/kernel/rcupdate.c @@ -238,7 +238,8 @@ static int __cpuinit rcu_barrier_cpu_hotplug(struct notifier_block *self, call_rcu_bh(rcu_migrate_head, rcu_migrate_callback); call_rcu_sched(rcu_migrate_head + 1, rcu_migrate_callback); call_rcu(rcu_migrate_head + 2, rcu_migrate_callback); - } else if (action == CPU_POST_DEAD) { + } else if (action == CPU_DOWN_PREPARE) { + /* Don't need to wait until next removal operation. */ /* rcu_migrate_head is protected by cpu_add_remove_lock */ wait_migrated_callbacks(); }