On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 07:04:16PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 01:57:50AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > So this thread is going to poll every second? I guess something prevents it
> > to run when system is idle somewhere? But I'm not familiar with the whole
> > patchset
> > yet. But even without that it looks like a very annoying noise. why not use
> > something
> > wait/wakeup based?
>
> And a later patch does the wait/wakeup thing. Start stupid, add small
> amounts of sophistication incrementally.
Aah indeed! :)
>
> > > + flush_signals(current);
> > > + continue;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Wait for all pre-existing t->on_rq and t->nvcsw
> > > + * transitions to complete. Invoking synchronize_sched()
> > > + * suffices because all these transitions occur with
> > > + * interrupts disabled. Without this synchronize_sched(),
> > > + * a read-side critical section that started before the
> > > + * grace period might be incorrectly seen as having started
> > > + * after the grace period.
> > > + *
> > > + * This synchronize_sched() also dispenses with the
> > > + * need for a memory barrier on the first store to
> > > + * ->rcu_tasks_holdout, as it forces the store to happen
> > > + * after the beginning of the grace period.
> > > + */
> > > + synchronize_sched();
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * There were callbacks, so we need to wait for an
> > > + * RCU-tasks grace period. Start off by scanning
> > > + * the task list for tasks that are not already
> > > + * voluntarily blocked. Mark these tasks and make
> > > + * a list of them in rcu_tasks_holdouts.
> > > + */
> > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > > + for_each_process_thread(g, t) {
> > > + if (t != current && ACCESS_ONCE(t->on_rq) &&
> > > + !is_idle_task(t)) {
> > > + get_task_struct(t);
> > > + t->rcu_tasks_nvcsw = ACCESS_ONCE(t->nvcsw);
> > > + ACCESS_ONCE(t->rcu_tasks_holdout) = 1;
> > > + list_add(&t->rcu_tasks_holdout_list,
> > > + &rcu_tasks_holdouts);
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Each pass through the following loop scans the list
> > > + * of holdout tasks, removing any that are no longer
> > > + * holdouts. When the list is empty, we are done.
> > > + */
> > > + while (!list_empty(&rcu_tasks_holdouts)) {
> > > + schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ / 10);
> >
> > OTOH here it is not annoying because it should only happen when rcu task
> > is used, which should be rare.
>
> Glad you like it!
>
> I will likely also add checks for other things needing the current CPU.
Ok, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
