In the past, SRCU was simple enough that there was little point in
making the rcutorture writer stall messages print the SRCU grace-period
number state. With the advent of Tree SRCU, this has changed. This
commit therefore makes Classic, Tiny, and Tree SRCU report this state
to rcutorture as needed.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
The current Tree SRCU implementation schedules a workqueue for every
srcu_data covered by a given leaf srcu_node structure having callbacks,
even if only one of those srcu_data structures actually contains
callbacks. This is clearly inefficient for workloads that don't feature
callbacks everywhere all the time. This commit therefore adds an array
of masks that are used by the leaf srcu_node structures to track exactly
which srcu_data structures contain callbacks.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Although Tree SRCU does reduce delays when there is at least one
synchronize_srcu_expedited() invocation pending, srcu_schedule_cbs_snp()
still waits for SRCU_INTERVAL before invoking callbacks. Since
synchronize_srcu_expedited() now posts a callback and waits for
that callback to do a wakeup, this destroys the expedited nature of
synchronize_srcu_expedited(). This destruction became apparent to
Marc Zyngier in the guise of a guest-OS bootup slowdown from five
seconds to no fewer than forty seconds.
This commit therefore invokes callbacks immediately at the end of the
grace period when there is at least one synchronize_srcu_expedited()
invocation pending. This brought Marc's guest-OS bootup times back
into the realm of reason.
Reported-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1,2],
however, there are workloads that could result in a high volume of
concurrent invocations of call_srcu(), which with current SRCU would
result in excessive lock contention on the srcu_struct structure's
->queue_lock, which protects SRCU's callback lists. This commit therefore
moves SRCU to per-CPU callback lists, thus greatly reducing contention.
Because a given SRCU instance no longer has a single centralized callback
list, starting grace periods and invoking callbacks are both more complex
than in the single-list Classic SRCU implementation. Starting grace
periods and handling callbacks are now handled using an srcu_node tree
that is in some ways similar to the rcu_node trees used by RCU-bh,
RCU-preempt, and RCU-sched (for example, the srcu_node tree shape is
controlled by exactly the same Kconfig options and boot parameters that
control the shape of the rcu_node tree).
In addition, the old per-CPU srcu_array structure is now named srcu_data
and contains an rcu_segcblist structure named ->srcu_cblist for its
callbacks (and a spinlock to protect this). The srcu_struct gets
an srcu_gp_seq that is used to associate callback segments with the
corresponding completion-time grace-period number. These completion-time
grace-period numbers are propagated up the srcu_node tree so that the
grace-period workqueue handler can determine whether additional grace
periods are needed on the one hand and where to look for callbacks that
are ready to be invoked.
The srcu_barrier() function must now wait on all instances of the per-CPU
->srcu_cblist. Because each ->srcu_cblist is protected by ->lock,
srcu_barrier() can remotely add the needed callbacks. In theory,
it could also remotely start grace periods, but in practice doing so
is complex and racy. And interestingly enough, it is never necessary
for srcu_barrier() to start a grace period because srcu_barrier() only
enqueues a callback when a callback is already present--and it turns out
that a grace period has to have already been started for this pre-existing
callback. Furthermore, it is only the callback that srcu_barrier()
needs to wait on, not any particular grace period. Therefore, a new
rcu_segcblist_entrain() function enqueues the srcu_barrier() function's
callback into the same segment occupied by the last pre-existing callback
in the list. The special case where all the pre-existing callbacks are
on a different list (because they are in the process of being invoked)
is handled by enqueuing srcu_barrier()'s callback into the RCU_DONE_TAIL
segment, relying on the done-callbacks check that takes place after all
callbacks are inovked.
Note that the readers use the same algorithm as before. Note that there
is a separate srcu_idx that tells the readers what counter to increment.
This unfortunately cannot be combined with srcu_gp_seq because they
need to be incremented at different times.
This commit introduces some ugly #ifdefs in rcutorture. These will go
away when I feel good enough about Tree SRCU to ditch Classic SRCU.
Some crude performance comparisons, courtesy of a quickly hacked rcuperf
asynchronous-grace-period capability:
Callback Queuing Overhead
-------------------------
# CPUS Classic SRCU Tree SRCU
------ ------------ ---------
2 0.349 us 0.342 us
16 31.66 us 0.4 us
41 --------- 0.417 us
The times are the 90th percentiles, a statistic that was chosen to reject
the overheads of the occasional srcu_barrier() call needed to avoid OOMing
the test machine. The rcuperf test hangs when running Classic SRCU at 41
CPUs, hence the line of dashes. Despite the hacks to both the rcuperf code
and that statistics, this is a convincing demonstration of Tree SRCU's
performance and scalability advantages.
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/309030/
[2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5108281/
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
[ paulmck: Fix initialization if synchronize_srcu_expedited() called first. ]
The TREE_SRCU rewrite is large and a bit on the non-simple side, so
this commit helps reduce risk by allowing the old v4.11 SRCU algorithm
to be selected using a new CLASSIC_SRCU Kconfig option that depends
on RCU_EXPERT. The default is to use the new TREE_SRCU and TINY_SRCU
algorithms, in order to help get these the testing that they need.
However, if your users do not require the update-side scalability that
is to be provided by TREE_SRCU, select RCU_EXPERT and then CLASSIC_SRCU
to revert back to the old classic SRCU algorithm.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Paul E. McKenney