linux-toradex.git/kernel/rcutree.c, branch v3.2.73

rcu: Fix batch-limit size problem

2013-01-03T03:33:08+00:00

commit 878d7439d0f45a95869e417576774673d1fa243f upstream.

Commit 29c00b4a1d9e27 (rcu: Add event-tracing for RCU callback
invocation) added a regression in rcu_do_batch()

Under stress, RCU is supposed to allow to process all items in queue,
instead of a batch of 10 items (blimit), but an integer overflow makes
the effective limit being 1.  So, unless there is frequent idle periods
(during which RCU ignores batch limits), RCU can be forced into a
state where it cannot keep up with the callback-generation rate,
eventually resulting in OOM.

This commit therefore converts a few variables in rcu_do_batch() from
int to long to fix this problem, along with the module parameters
controlling the batch limits.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
[bwh: Backported to 3.2:
 - Adjust context
 - Module parameters remain hidden from sysfs]
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings

rcu: Fix day-one dyntick-idle stall-warning bug

2012-10-17T02:48:43+00:00

commit a10d206ef1a83121ab7430cb196e0376a7145b22 upstream.

Each grace period is supposed to have at least one callback waiting
for that grace period to complete.  However, if CONFIG_NO_HZ=n, an
extra callback-free grace period is no big problem -- it will chew up
a tiny bit of CPU time, but it will complete normally.  In contrast,
CONFIG_NO_HZ=y kernels have the potential for all the CPUs to go to
sleep indefinitely, in turn indefinitely delaying completion of the
callback-free grace period.  Given that nothing is waiting on this grace
period, this is also not a problem.

That is, unless RCU CPU stall warnings are also enabled, as they are
in recent kernels.  In this case, if a CPU wakes up after at least one
minute of inactivity, an RCU CPU stall warning will result.  The reason
that no one noticed until quite recently is that most systems have enough
OS noise that they will never remain absolutely idle for a full minute.
But there are some embedded systems with cut-down userspace configurations
that consistently get into this situation.

All this begs the question of exactly how a callback-free grace period
gets started in the first place.  This can happen due to the fact that
CPUs do not necessarily agree on which grace period is in progress.
If a CPU still believes that the grace period that just completed is
still ongoing, it will believe that it has callbacks that need to wait for
another grace period, never mind the fact that the grace period that they
were waiting for just completed.  This CPU can therefore erroneously
decide to start a new grace period.  Note that this can happen in
TREE_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU even on a single-CPU system:  Deadlock
considerations mean that the CPU that detected the end of the grace
period is not necessarily officially informed of this fact for some time.

Once this CPU notices that the earlier grace period completed, it will
invoke its callbacks.  It then won't have any callbacks left.  If no
other CPU has any callbacks, we now have a callback-free grace period.

This commit therefore makes CPUs check more carefully before starting a
new grace period.  This new check relies on an array of tail pointers
into each CPU's list of callbacks.  If the CPU is up to date on which
grace periods have completed, it checks to see if any callbacks follow
the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment, otherwise it checks to see if any callbacks
follow the RCU_WAIT_TAIL segment.  The reason that this works is that
the RCU_WAIT_TAIL segment will be promoted to the RCU_DONE_TAIL segment
as soon as the CPU is officially notified that the old grace period
has ended.

This change is to cpu_needs_another_gp(), which is called in a number
of places.  The only one that really matters is in rcu_start_gp(), where
the root rcu_node structure's ->lock is held, which prevents any
other CPU from starting or completing a grace period, so that the
comparison that determines whether the CPU is missing the completion
of a grace period is stable.

Reported-by: Becky Bruce 
Reported-by: Subodh Nijsure 
Reported-by: Paul Walmsley 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Tested-by: Paul Walmsley   # OMAP3730, OMAP4430
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings

kernel: Map most files to use export.h instead of module.h

2011-10-31T13:20:12+00:00

The changed files were only including linux/module.h for the
EXPORT_SYMBOL infrastructure, and nothing else.  Revector them
onto the isolated export header for faster compile times.

Nothing to see here but a whole lot of instances of:

  -#include 
  +#include 

This commit is only changing the kernel dir; next targets
will probably be mm, fs, the arch dirs, etc.

Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker

rcu: Move propagation of ->completed from rcu_start_gp() to rcu_report_qs_rsp()

2011-09-29T04:38:49+00:00

It is possible for the CPU that noted the end of the prior grace period
to not need a new one, and therefore to decide to propagate ->completed
throughout the rcu_node tree without starting another grace period.
However, in so doing, it releases the root rcu_node structure's lock,
which can allow some other CPU to start another grace period.  The first
CPU will be propagating ->completed in parallel with the second CPU
initializing the rcu_node tree for the new grace period.  In theory
this is harmless, but in practice we need to keep things simple.

This commit therefore moves the propagation of ->completed to
rcu_report_qs_rsp(), and refrains from marking the old grace period
as having been completed until it has finished doing this.  This
prevents anyone from starting a new grace period concurrently with
marking the old grace period as having been completed.

Of course, the optimization where a CPU needing a new grace period
doesn't bother marking the old one completed is still in effect:
In that case, the marking happens implicitly as part of initializing
the new grace period.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Remove rcu_needs_cpu_flush() to avoid false quiescent states

2011-09-29T04:38:48+00:00

The purpose of rcu_needs_cpu_flush() was to iterate on pushing the
current grace period in order to help the current CPU enter dyntick-idle
mode.  However, this can result in failures if the CPU starts entering
dyntick-idle mode, but then backs out.  In this case, the call to
rcu_pending() from rcu_needs_cpu_flush() might end up announcing a
non-existing quiescent state.

This commit therefore removes rcu_needs_cpu_flush() in favor of letting
the dyntick-idle machinery at the end of the softirq handler push the
loop along via its call to rcu_pending().

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Wire up RCU_BOOST_PRIO for rcutree

2011-09-29T04:38:47+00:00

RCU boost threads start life at RCU_BOOST_PRIO, while others remain
at RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO.  While here, change thread names to match other
kthreads, and adjust rcu_yield() to not override the priority set by
the user.  This last change sets the stage for runtime changes to
priority in the -rt tree.

Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Avoid having just-onlined CPU resched itself when RCU is idle

2011-09-29T04:38:42+00:00

CPUs set rdp->qs_pending when coming online to resolve races with
grace-period start.  However, this means that if RCU is idle, the
just-onlined CPU might needlessly send itself resched IPIs.  Adjust
the online-CPU initialization to avoid this, and also to correctly
cause the CPU to respond to the current grace period if needed.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Tested-by: Josh Boyer 
Tested-by: Christian Hoffmann

rcu: Suppress NMI backtraces when stall ends before dump

2011-09-29T04:38:41+00:00

It is possible for an RCU CPU stall to end just as it is detected, in
which case the current code will uselessly dump all CPU's stacks.
This commit therefore checks for this condition and refrains from
sending needless NMIs.

And yes, the stall might also end just after we checked all CPUs and
tasks, but in that case we would at least have given some clue as
to which CPU/task was at fault.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Prohibit grace periods during early boot

2011-09-29T04:38:40+00:00

Greater use of RCU during early boot (before the scheduler is operating)
is causing RCU to attempt to start grace periods during that time, which
in turn is resulting in both RCU and the callback functions attempting
to use the scheduler before it is ready.

This commit prevents these problems by prohibiting RCU grace periods
until after the scheduler has spawned the first non-idle task.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Prevent early boot set_need_resched() from __rcu_pending()

2011-09-29T04:38:37+00:00

There isn't a whole lot of point in poking the scheduler before there
are other tasks to switch to.  This commit therefore adds a check
for rcu_scheduler_fully_active in __rcu_pending() to suppress any
pre-scheduler calls to set_need_resched().  The downside of this approach
is additional runtime overhead in a reasonably hot code path.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney 
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney