lkmm.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	lkmm@lists.linux.dev, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
	aeh@meta.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
	jhs@mojatatu.com, kernel-team@meta.com,
	Erik Lundgren <elundgren@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] shazptr: Avoid synchronize_shaptr() busy waiting
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 13:56:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250625115643.GE1613376@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250625031101.12555-5-boqun.feng@gmail.com>


Response is a bit weird because non-linear editing..

On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 08:10:57PM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:

> +	/* Whether the scan kthread has been scheduled to scan */
> +	bool scheduled;

> +static int __noreturn shazptr_scan_kthread(void *unused)
> +{
> +	for (;;) {
> +		swait_event_idle_exclusive(shazptr_scan.wq,
> +					   READ_ONCE(shazptr_scan.scheduled));

This seems weird; why use a whole wait-queue, in exclusive mode no less,
for something that is one known thread.

Also, I think this thing needs to be FREEZABLE, otherwise suspend might
have issues.

Why not just write it like:

		for (;;) {
			set_current_state(TASK_IDLE | TASK_FREEZABLE);
			if (!list_empty(&scan->queue))
				break;
			schedule();
		}
		__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNABLE);

		for (;;) {
			scoped_guard (mutex, scan->lock) {
				if (list_empty(scan->queued) &&
				    list_empty(scan->scanning))
					break;
			}

			shazptr_do_scan(scan);
		}


> +		shazptr_do_scan(&shazptr_scan);
> +
> +		scoped_guard(mutex, &shazptr_scan.lock) {
> +			if (list_empty(&shazptr_scan.queued) &&
> +			    list_empty(&shazptr_scan.scanning))
> +				shazptr_scan.scheduled = false;

This condition, why can't we directly use this condition instead of
scheduled?

> +		}
> +	}
> +}


> +static void synchronize_shazptr_normal(void *ptr)
> +{

> +
> +	/* Found blocking slots, prepare to wait. */
> +	if (blocking_grp_mask) {
> +		struct shazptr_scan *scan = &shazptr_scan;
> +		struct shazptr_wait wait = {
> +			.blocking_grp_mask = blocking_grp_mask,
> +		};
> +
> +		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&wait.list);
> +		init_completion(&wait.done);
> +
> +		scoped_guard(mutex, &scan->lock) {
> +			list_add_tail(&wait.list, &scan->queued);
> +
> +			if (!scan->scheduled) {
> +				WRITE_ONCE(scan->scheduled, true);
> +				swake_up_one(&shazptr_scan.wq);
> +			}

Or perhaps; just write this like:

			bool was_empty = list_empty(&scan->queued);
			list_add_tail(&wait.list, &scan->queued);
			if (was_empty)
				wake_up_process(scan->thread);

> +		}
> +
> +		wait_for_completion(&wait.done);
> +	}
> +}


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-06-25 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-25  3:10 [PATCH 0/8] Introduce simple hazard pointers for lockdep Boqun Feng
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 1/8] Introduce simple hazard pointers Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 10:00   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-25 14:25   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-06-25 15:05     ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 15:52   ` Waiman Long
2025-06-25 16:09     ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 17:47       ` Waiman Long
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 2/8] shazptr: Add refscale test Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 10:02   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 3/8] shazptr: Add refscale test for wildcard Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 10:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 4/8] shazptr: Avoid synchronize_shaptr() busy waiting Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 11:40   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-25 11:56   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-06-25 13:56   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-25 15:24     ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-26 13:45       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 5/8] shazptr: Allow skip self scan in synchronize_shaptr() Boqun Feng
2025-06-25  3:10 ` [PATCH 6/8] rcuscale: Allow rcu_scale_ops::get_gp_seq to be NULL Boqun Feng
2025-06-25  3:11 ` [PATCH 7/8] rcuscale: Add tests for simple hazard pointers Boqun Feng
2025-06-25  3:11 ` [PATCH 8/8] locking/lockdep: Use shazptr to protect the key hashlist Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 11:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-25 14:18     ` Boqun Feng
2025-07-10 14:06   ` Breno Leitao
2025-07-11  2:31     ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-25 12:05 ` [PATCH 0/8] Introduce simple hazard pointers for lockdep Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-25 14:08   ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-26 10:16     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-26 13:45       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-06-26 15:47       ` Boqun Feng
2025-06-27  2:56         ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-06-25 12:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-06-25 13:21   ` Boqun Feng

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=20250625115643.GE1613376@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=aeh@meta.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=elundgren@meta.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkmm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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).