Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: Add cond_resched_rcu_lock() helper
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Date: 2013-05-02 10:05:25
Also in:
lkml, lvs-devel, netfilter-devel
Hello, On Thu, 2 May 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:22:08PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:quoted
quoted
+extern int __cond_resched_rcu(void); + +#define cond_resched_rcu() ({ \ + __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, 0); \I see your goal. But digging into __might_sleep() I see that rcu_sleep_check() will scream for the non-preempt case because we are under rcu_read_lock.#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 0 #else #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 1 #endif #define cond_resched_rcu() ({ \ __might_sleep(__FILE__, __LINE__, PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET); \ __cond_resched_rcu(); \ }) Should work I think..
Looks like CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP selects CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT, so PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET should be 1 in all cases because preempt_disable() adds 1, while for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU case rcu_preempt_depth() should return 1: #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET 1 #else #define PREEMPT_RCU_OFFSET PREEMPT_CHECK_OFFSET #endif Now the remaining part is to fix rcu_sleep_check() for the non-preempt case. As there are no nesting depths in this case, I don't see a solution so far. We can provide some argument to rcu_preempt_sleep_check to compare depth with preempt_count() but currently I don't know how to differentiate cond_resched_lock() from cond_resched_rcu() when calling __might_sleep, in both cases we provide PREEMPT_OFFSET. May be some trick is needed here without adding new arg to __might_sleep, so that we can properly check for rcu_lock_map. Regards -- Julian Anastasov [off-list ref]