Re: [PATCH RFC] Priority boosting for preemptible RCU
From: Paul E. McKenney <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-23 08:55:22
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 09:56:39AM +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Hi Paul, On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 12:02:54PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:quoted
+/* + * Print out RCU booster task statistics at the specified interval. + */ +static void rcu_boost_dat_stat_print(void) +{ + /* Three decimal digits per byte plus spacing per number and line. */ + char buf[N_RCU_BOOST_STATE * (sizeof(long) * 3 + 2) + 2]; + int cpu; + int event; + int i; + static time_t lastprint = 0; + struct rcu_boost_dat *rbdp; + int state; + struct rcu_boost_dat sum; + + /* Wait a graceful interval between printk spamming. */ + + if (xtime.tv_sec - lastprint < + CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU_BOOST_STATS_INTERVAL) + return; + + /* Sum up the state/event-independent counters. */ + + sum.rbs_blocked = 0; + sum.rbs_boost_attempt = 0; + sum.rbs_boost = 0; + sum.rbs_unlock = 0; + sum.rbs_unboosted = 0; + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) + for (i = 0; i < RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS; i++) { + rbdp = per_cpu(rcu_boost_dat, cpu); + sum.rbs_blocked += rbdp[i].rbs_blocked; + sum.rbs_boost_attempt += rbdp[i].rbs_boost_attempt; + sum.rbs_boost += rbdp[i].rbs_boost; + sum.rbs_unlock += rbdp[i].rbs_unlock; + sum.rbs_unboosted += rbdp[i].rbs_unboosted; + }I feel we should still be able to use for_each_online_cpu(cpu) instead of for_each_possible_cpu. Again, there's a good chance that I might be mistaken! How about the following ? preempt_disable(); /* We Dont want cpus going down here */ for_each_online_cpu(cpu) for (i = 0; i < RCU_BOOST_ELEMENTS; i++) { rbdp = per_cpu(rcu_boost_dat, cpu); sum.rbs_blocked += rbdp[i].rbs_blocked; sum.rbs_boost_attempt += rbdp[i].rbs_boost_attempt; sum.rbs_boost += rbdp[i].rbs_boost; sum.rbs_unlock += rbdp[i].rbs_unlock; sum.rbs_unboosted += rbdp[i].rbs_unboosted; } preempt_enable(); static int rcu_boost_cpu_callback(struct notifier_bloack *nb, unsigned long action, void *hcpu) { int this_cpu, cpu; rcu_boost_data *rbdp, *this_rbdp; switch (action) { case CPU_DEAD: this_cpu = get_cpu(); cpu = (long)hcpu; this_cpu = smp_processor_id(); rbdp = per_cpu(rcu_boost_dat, cpu); this_rbdp = per_cpu(rcu_boost_dat, cpu); /* * Transfer all of rbdp's statistics to * this_rbdp here. */ put_cpu(); return NOTIFY_OK; } } Won't this work in this case?
Hello, Gautham, We could do something similar. If there was a global rcu_boost_data variable that held the sums of the fields of the rcu_boost_data structures for all offline CPUs, and if we used a new lock to protect that global rcu_boost data variable (both when reading and when CPU hotplugging), then we could indeed scan only the online CPUs' rcu_boost_data elements. We would also have to maintain a cpumask_t for this purpose, and we would need to add a CPU's contribution when it went offline and subtract it when that CPU came back online. The lock should not be a problem even on very large systems because of the low frequency of statistics printing -- and of hotplug operations, for that matter. Thanx, Paul