On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 02:45:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > sched,rcu: Make cond_resched() report RCU quiescent states
> >
> > Given a CPU running a loop containing cond_resched(), with no
> > other tasks runnable on that CPU, RCU will eventually report RCU
> > CPU stall warnings due to la
> sched,rcu: Make cond_resched() report RCU quiescent states
>
> Given a CPU running a loop containing cond_resched(), with no
> other tasks runnable on that CPU, RCU will eventually report RCU
> CPU stall warnings due to lack of quiescent states. Fortunately,
> every call to cond_resched() is a
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:51:18AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 07:17:06PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 06:14:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 09:58:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > @@ -4111,6 +4115,7
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 07:17:06PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 06:14:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 09:58:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > @@ -4111,6 +4115,7 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
> > > {
> > > BUG_ON(!in_
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 06:14:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 09:58:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > @@ -4111,6 +4115,7 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
> > {
> > BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
> >
> > + rcu_cond_resched();
>
> Don't you have to enabl
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 09:58:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> @@ -4111,6 +4115,7 @@ int __sched __cond_resched_softirq(void)
> {
> BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
>
> + rcu_cond_resched();
Don't you have to enable BHs before doing that? And if not; that needs a
comment for sure! :-)
>
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:13:00AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 06:59:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > So I have been tightening up rcutorture a bit over the past year.
> > The other day, I came across what looked like a great opportunity for
> > further tightening,
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 06:59:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> So I have been tightening up rcutorture a bit over the past year.
> The other day, I came across what looked like a great opportunity for
> further tightening, namely the schedule() in rcu_torture_reader().
> Why not turn this into
On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 23:25 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 07:09:42AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Hm. Since you only care about the case where your task is solo, how
> > about do racy checks, 100% accuracy isn't required is it? Seems you
> > wouldn't want to uncon
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 07:14:15AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 07:09 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 18:59 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > index b46131ef6aab..994d2b0fd0b2 100644
>
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 07:09:42AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 18:59 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > So I have been tightening up rcutorture a bit over the past year.
> > The other day, I came across what looked like a great opportunity for
> > further tightening, namel
On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 07:09 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 18:59 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index b46131ef6aab..994d2b0fd0b2 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -4075,6
On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 18:59 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> So I have been tightening up rcutorture a bit over the past year.
> The other day, I came across what looked like a great opportunity for
> further tightening, namely the schedule() in rcu_torture_reader().
> Why not turn this into a con
So I have been tightening up rcutorture a bit over the past year.
The other day, I came across what looked like a great opportunity for
further tightening, namely the schedule() in rcu_torture_reader().
Why not turn this into a cond_resched(), speeding up the readers a bit
and placing more stress o
14 matches
Mail list logo
