From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Guo Ren" <guoren@kernel.org>, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se>,
Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi>,
Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
"John Paul Adrian Glaubitz" <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
"Dietmar Eggemann" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Daniel Bristot de Oliveira" <bristot@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Andrew Donnellan <ajd@linux.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Xin Li <xin3.li@intel.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
Tony Battersby <tonyb@cybernetics.com>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@oracle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
"Julia Lawall" <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
<linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-csky@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-openrisc@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
<linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>, <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:30:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnPam37GQleKSBsP@chenyu5-mobl2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1035ec64-b3d3-c398-d6e7-99745a14c294@amd.com>
On 2024-06-19 at 00:03:30 +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello Chenyu,
>
> On 6/18/2024 1:19 PM, Chen Yu wrote:
> > [..snip..]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vincent [5] pointed out a case where the idle load kick will fail to
> > > > > > > run on an idle CPU since the IPI handler launching the ILB will check
> > > > > > > for need_resched(). In such cases, the idle CPU relies on
> > > > > > > newidle_balance() to pull tasks towards itself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this the need_resched() in _nohz_idle_balance() ? Should we change
> > > > > > this to 'need_resched() && (rq->nr_running || rq->ttwu_pending)' or
> > > > > > something long those lines?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's not only this but also in do_idle() as well which exits the loop
> > > > > to look for tasks to schedule
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I mean, it's fairly trivial to figure out if there really is going to be
> > > > > > work there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Using an alternate flag instead of NEED_RESCHED to indicate a pending
> > > > > > > IPI was suggested as the correct approach to solve this problem on the
> > > > > > > same thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So adding per-arch changes for this seems like something we shouldn't
> > > > > > unless there really is no other sane options.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is, I really think we should start with something like the below
> > > > > > and then fix any fallout from that.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main problem is that need_resched becomes somewhat meaningless
> > > > > because it doesn't only mean "I need to resched a task" and we have
> > > > > to add more tests around even for those not using polling
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > > > > index 0935f9d4bb7b..cfa45338ae97 100644
> > > > > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > > > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > > > > @@ -5799,7 +5800,7 @@ static inline struct task_struct *
> > > > > > __pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > const struct sched_class *class;
> > > > > > - struct task_struct *p;
> > > > > > + struct task_struct *p = NULL;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /*
> > > > > > * Optimization: we know that if all tasks are in the fair class we can
> > > > > > @@ -5810,9 +5811,11 @@ __pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> > > > > > if (likely(!sched_class_above(prev->sched_class, &fair_sched_class) &&
> > > > > > rq->nr_running == rq->cfs.h_nr_running)) {
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - p = pick_next_task_fair(rq, prev, rf);
> > > > > > - if (unlikely(p == RETRY_TASK))
> > > > > > - goto restart;
> > > > > > + if (rq->nr_running) {
> > > > >
> > > > > How do you make the diff between a spurious need_resched() because of
> > > > > polling and a cpu becoming idle ? isn't rq->nr_running null in both
> > > > > cases ?
> > > > > In the later case, we need to call sched_balance_newidle() but not in the former
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not sure if I understand correctly, if the goal of smp_call_function_single() is to
> > > > kick the idle CPU and do not force it to launch the schedule()->sched_balance_newidle(),
> > > > can we set the _TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG rather than _TIF_NEED_RESCHED in set_nr_if_polling()?
> > > > I think writing any value to the monitor address would wakeup the idle CPU. And _TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG
> > > > will be cleared once that idle CPU exit the idle loop, so we don't introduce arch-wide flag.
> > > Although this might work for MWAIT, there is no way for the generic idle
> > > path to know if there is a pending interrupt within a TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG
> > > section. do_idle() sets TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG and relies on a bunch of
> > > need_resched() checks along the way to bail early until finally doing a
> > > current_clr_polling_and_test() before handing off to the cpuidle driver
> > > in call_cpuidle(). I believe this section will necessarily need the sender
> > > to indicate a pending interrupt via TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag to enable the
> > > early bail out before going into the cpuidle driver since this case cannot
> > > be considered the same as a break from MWAIT.
> > >
> >
> > I see, this is a good point. So you mean with only TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG there is
> > possibility that the 'ipi kick CPU out of idle' is lost after the CPU enters
> > do_idle() and before finally entering the idle state. While setting _TIF_NEED_RESCHED
> > could help the do_idle() loop to detect pending request easier.
>
> Yup, that is correct.
>
> > BTW, before the
> > commit b2a02fc43a1f ("smp: Optimize send_call_function_single_ipi()"), the
> > lost of ipi after entering do_idle() and before entering driver idle state
> > is also possible, right(the local irq is disabled)?
>
> From what I understand, the IPI remains pending until the interrupts
> are enabled again. Before the optimization, the interrupts would be
> disabled all the way until the instruction that is used to put the CPU
> to sleep which is what __sti_mwait() and native_safe_halt() does. The
> CPU would have received the IPI then and broke out of idle before
> Peter's optimization went in.
I see, once local irq is enabled, the pending ipi will be served.
> There is an elaborate comment on this in
> do_idle() function above the call to local_irq_disable(). In commit
> edc8fc01f608 ("x86: Fix CPUIDLE_FLAG_IRQ_ENABLE leaking timer
> reprogram") Peter describes a case of actually missing the break from
> an interrupt as the driver enabled interrupts much earlier than
> executing the sleep instruction.
>
Yup, the commit edc8fc01f608 deals with delay of the timer handling. If
a timer queues the callback after local irq enabled and before mwait,
the long sleep time after mwait might delay the handling of the callback.
> Since the CPU was in TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG state, one could simply get away
> by setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED and not sending an actual IPI which the
> need_resched() checks in the idle path would catch and the
> flush_smp_call_function_queue() on the exit path would have serviced the
> call function.
>
> MWAIT with Interrupt Break extension (CPUID 0x5 ECX[IBE]) can break out
> on pending interrupts even if interrupts are disabled which is why
> "mwait_idle_with_hints()" now checks "ecx" to choose between "__mwait()"
> and "__mwait_sti()". The APM describes the extension to "allows
> interrupts to wake MWAIT, even when eFLAGS.IF = 0". (Vol. 3.
> "General-Purpose and System Instructions", Chapter 4. "System Instruction
> Reference", Section "MWAIT")
>
> I do hope someone corrects me if I'm wrong :)
>
You are right, and thanks for the description.
thanks,
Chenyu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-20 7:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-13 18:15 [PATCH v2 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-13 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] thread_info: Add helpers to test and clear TIF_NOTIFY_IPI K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-13 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] sched: Define a need_resched_or_ipi() helper and use it treewide K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-13 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] sched/core: Use TIF_NOTIFY_IPI to notify an idle CPU in TIF_POLLING mode of pending IPI K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-13 18:16 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] alpha/thread_info: Introduce TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-14 9:28 ` [PATCH v2 00/14] Introducing " Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-14 10:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-06-14 16:31 ` Chen Yu
2024-06-17 8:33 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-18 7:49 ` Chen Yu
2024-06-18 18:33 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-20 7:30 ` Chen Yu [this message]
2024-06-15 1:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-15 1:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-16 14:57 ` Vincent Guittot
2024-06-17 5:52 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-06-15 1:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-15 14:26 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-06-17 4:35 ` K Prateek Nayak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZnPam37GQleKSBsP@chenyu5-mobl2 \
--to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=bgray@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=imran.f.khan@oracle.com \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jonas@southpole.se \
--cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=leobras@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-openrisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shorne@gmail.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tonyb@cybernetics.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin3.li@intel.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).