On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 02:44:15PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:34:53PM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> > <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > >
> > > This commit adds torture tests for RCU-tasks. It also fixes a bug that
> > > would segfault for an RCU flavor lacking a callback-barrier function.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>
> > > ---
> > > include/linux/rcupdate.h | 1 +
> > > kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c | 50
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > index e6aea256ad39..f504f797c9c8 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ enum rcutorture_type {
> > > RCU_FLAVOR,
> > > RCU_BH_FLAVOR,
> > > RCU_SCHED_FLAVOR,
> > > + RCU_TASKS_FLAVOR,
> > > SRCU_FLAVOR,
> > > INVALID_RCU_FLAVOR
> > > };
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > index febe07062ac5..52423f2c74da 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c
> > > @@ -601,6 +601,52 @@ static struct rcu_torture_ops sched_ops = {
> > > .name = "sched"
> > > };
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Definitions for RCU-tasks torture testing.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +static int tasks_torture_read_lock(void)
> > > +{
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void tasks_torture_read_unlock(int idx)
> > > +{
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void rcu_tasks_torture_deferred_free(struct rcu_torture *p)
> > > +{
> > > + call_rcu_tasks(&p->rtort_rcu, rcu_torture_cb);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static struct rcu_torture_ops tasks_ops = {
> > > + .ttype = RCU_TASKS_FLAVOR,
> > > + .init = rcu_sync_torture_init,
> > > + .readlock = tasks_torture_read_lock,
> > > + .read_delay = rcu_read_delay, /* just reuse rcu's version. */
> > > + .readunlock = tasks_torture_read_unlock,
> > > + .completed = rcu_no_completed,
> > > + .deferred_free = rcu_tasks_torture_deferred_free,
> > > + .sync = synchronize_rcu_tasks,
> > > + .exp_sync = synchronize_rcu_tasks,
> > > + .call = call_rcu_tasks,
> > > + .cb_barrier = rcu_barrier_tasks,
> > > + .fqs = NULL,
> > > + .stats = NULL,
> > > + .irq_capable = 1,
> > > + .name = "tasks"
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +#define RCUTORTURE_TASKS_OPS &tasks_ops,
> >
> > Not sure about the comma here, no harm but still... a minor nit :)
>
> Good point, it would be better to parenthesize this an put the comma
> at the point of use. Fixed!
Except that this gives me a syntax error when CONFIG_TASKS_RCU=n because
we end up with a pair of consecutive commas. Nice try, though! ;-)
Thanx, Paul
> > > +
> > > +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU */
> > > +
> > > +#define RCUTORTURE_TASKS_OPS
> > > +
> > > +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TASKS_RCU */
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * RCU torture priority-boost testing. Runs one real-time thread per
> > > * CPU for moderate bursts, repeatedly registering RCU callbacks and
> > > @@ -1295,7 +1341,8 @@ static int rcu_torture_barrier_cbs(void *arg)
> > > if (atomic_dec_and_test(&barrier_cbs_count))
> > > wake_up(&barrier_wq);
> > > } while (!torture_must_stop());
> > > - cur_ops->cb_barrier();
> > > + if (cur_ops->cb_barrier != NULL)
> > > + cur_ops->cb_barrier();
> > > destroy_rcu_head_on_stack(&rcu);
> > > torture_kthread_stopping("rcu_torture_barrier_cbs");
> > > return 0;
> > > @@ -1534,6 +1581,7 @@ rcu_torture_init(void)
> > > int firsterr = 0;
> > > static struct rcu_torture_ops *torture_ops[] = {
> > > &rcu_ops, &rcu_bh_ops, &rcu_busted_ops, &srcu_ops,
> > > &sched_ops,
> > > + RCUTORTURE_TASKS_OPS
> > > };
> > >
> > > if (!torture_init_begin(torture_type, verbose,
> > > &rcutorture_runnable))
> > > --
> > > 1.8.1.5
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pranith
> >
--
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/
