[PATCH 5/5][RFC] rcu: start new grace period from rcu_pending()

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>]

Resend, see the previous dicsussion:
	http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=110442762800019
Manfred Spraul has another (better) idea to speedup qs detection, but
that would be a more radical change.

Let's suppose that cpu is running idle thread or user level process, and
the grace period was started. Currently we need 2 local timer interrupts
to happen before this cpu can signal the end of it's grace period. This is
because rcu_check_quiescent_state() will reset ->passed_quiesc before it
sets ->qs_pending = 1.

I think it is better to set ->qs_pending = 1 directly in __rcu_pending():

	int __rcu_pending()
	{
		if (qs_pending) return 1;

		if (rdp->quiescbatch != rcp->cur) {
			passed_quiesc = 0;
			barrier();
			qs_pending = 1;
			return 1;
		}
		... other checks ...
	}

	void rcu_check_quiescent_state()
	{
		if (!qs_pending) return;
		barrier();
		if (!passed_quiesc) return;

		cpu_quiet();

		qs_pending = 0;
	}

This way the grace period for that cpu will be completed after the 1st irq.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>

--- 2.6.15/kernel/rcupdate.c~5_SPEEDUP	2006-01-08 23:49:31.000000000 +0300
+++ 2.6.15/kernel/rcupdate.c	2006-01-09 00:26:44.000000000 +0300
@@ -292,28 +292,25 @@ static void cpu_quiet(int cpu, struct rc
 static void rcu_check_quiescent_state(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp,
 					struct rcu_data *rdp)
 {
-	if (rdp->quiescbatch != rcp->cur) {
-		/* start new grace period: */
-		rdp->qs_pending = 1;
-		rdp->passed_quiesc = 0;
-		rdp->quiescbatch = rcp->cur;
-		return;
-	}
-
 	/* Grace period already completed for this cpu?
 	 * qs_pending is checked instead of the actual bitmap to avoid
 	 * cacheline trashing.
 	 */
 	if (!rdp->qs_pending)
 		return;
+	/*
+	 * Protect against the race with __rcu_pending() from local interrupt.
+	 * We should read ->passed_quiesc after we checked ->qs_pending != 0.
+	 * These vars are cpu-local, no need to use memory barriers.
+	 */
+	barrier();
 
-	/* 
+	/*
 	 * Was there a quiescent state since the beginning of the grace
 	 * period? If no, then exit and wait for the next call.
 	 */
 	if (!rdp->passed_quiesc)
 		return;
-	rdp->qs_pending = 0;
 
 	spin_lock(&rcp->lock);
 	/*
@@ -324,6 +321,8 @@ static void rcu_check_quiescent_state(st
 		cpu_quiet(rdp->cpu, rcp);
 
 	spin_unlock(&rcp->lock);
+
+	rdp->qs_pending = 0;
 }
 
 
@@ -435,6 +434,20 @@ static void rcu_process_callbacks(unsign
 
 static int __rcu_pending(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp, struct rcu_data *rdp)
 {
+	/* The rcu core waits for a quiescent state from the cpu */
+	if (rdp->qs_pending)
+		return 1;
+
+	if (rdp->quiescbatch != rcp->cur) {
+		/* start new grace period: */
+		rdp->quiescbatch = rcp->cur;
+		rdp->passed_quiesc = 0;
+		/* see the comment in rcu_check_quiescent_state() */
+		barrier();
+		rdp->qs_pending = 1;
+		return 1;
+	}
+
 	/* This cpu has pending rcu entries and the grace period
 	 * for them has completed.
 	 */
@@ -445,10 +458,6 @@ static int __rcu_pending(struct rcu_ctrl
 	if (!rdp->curlist && rdp->nxtlist)
 		return 1;
 
-	/* The rcu core waits for a quiescent state from the cpu */
-	if (rdp->quiescbatch != rcp->cur || rdp->qs_pending)
-		return 1;
-
 	/* nothing to do */
 	return 0;
 }
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/