From a82dcc76021e22c174ba85d90b7a8c750b7362d0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:29:20 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] rcu: Make offline-CPU checking allow for indefinite delays The rcu_implicit_offline_qs() function implicitly assumed that execution would progress predictably when interrupts are disabled, which is of course not guaranteed when running on a hypervisor. Furthermore, this function is short, and is called from one place only in a short function. This commit therefore ensures that the timing is checked before checking the condition, which guarantees correct behavior even given indefinite delays. It also inlines rcu_implicit_offline_qs() into rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(). Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett --- kernel/rcutree.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c index f7bcd9e..2c4ee4c 100644 --- a/kernel/rcutree.c +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c @@ -319,35 +319,6 @@ static struct rcu_node *rcu_get_root(struct rcu_state *rsp) } /* - * If the specified CPU is offline, tell the caller that it is in - * a quiescent state. Otherwise, whack it with a reschedule IPI. - * Grace periods can end up waiting on an offline CPU when that - * CPU is in the process of coming online -- it will be added to the - * rcu_node bitmasks before it actually makes it online. The same thing - * can happen while a CPU is in the process of coming online. Because this - * race is quite rare, we check for it after detecting that the grace - * period has been delayed rather than checking each and every CPU - * each and every time we start a new grace period. - */ -static int rcu_implicit_offline_qs(struct rcu_data *rdp) -{ - /* - * If the CPU is offline for more than a jiffy, it is in a quiescent - * state. We can trust its state not to change because interrupts - * are disabled. The reason for the jiffy's worth of slack is to - * handle CPUs initializing on the way up and finding their way - * to the idle loop on the way down. - */ - if (cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu) && - ULONG_CMP_LT(rdp->rsp->gp_start + 2, jiffies)) { - trace_rcu_fqs(rdp->rsp->name, rdp->gpnum, rdp->cpu, "ofl"); - rdp->offline_fqs++; - return 1; - } - return 0; -} - -/* * rcu_idle_enter_common - inform RCU that current CPU is moving towards idle * * If the new value of the ->dynticks_nesting counter now is zero, @@ -675,7 +646,7 @@ static int dyntick_save_progress_counter(struct rcu_data *rdp) * Return true if the specified CPU has passed through a quiescent * state by virtue of being in or having passed through an dynticks * idle state since the last call to dyntick_save_progress_counter() - * for this same CPU. + * for this same CPU, or by virtue of having been offline. */ static int rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(struct rcu_data *rdp) { @@ -699,8 +670,26 @@ static int rcu_implicit_dynticks_qs(struct rcu_data *rdp) return 1; } - /* Go check for the CPU being offline. */ - return rcu_implicit_offline_qs(rdp); + /* + * Check for the CPU being offline, but only if the grace period + * is old enough. We don't need to worry about the CPU changing + * state: If we see it offline even once, it has been through a + * quiescent state. + * + * The reason for insisting that the grace period be at least + * one jiffy old is that CPUs that are not quite online and that + * have just gone offline can still execute RCU read-side critical + * sections. + */ + if (ULONG_CMP_GE(rdp->rsp->gp_start + 2, jiffies)) + return 0; /* Grace period is not old enough. */ + barrier(); + if (cpu_is_offline(rdp->cpu)) { + trace_rcu_fqs(rdp->rsp->name, rdp->gpnum, rdp->cpu, "ofl"); + rdp->offline_fqs++; + return 1; + } + return 0; } static int jiffies_till_stall_check(void) -- 2.7.4