[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2] Add rcu user eqs exception hooks for async page fault
2012/11/28 Li Zhong <>:
> Thank you all for the review and education.
> Below are my current understandings and an update version. Would you
> please help to review it again and give your comments?
> Thanks, Zhong
> Now it seems to me that it is legal to call rcu_irq_exit/enter() without
> a matching rcu_irq_enter/exit() if the cpu is in non rcu idle state.
> As opposite, it is illegal to call rcu_irq_exit() without a matching
> rcu_irq_enter() if the cpu is in rcu idle state.
> But it seems legal to call rcu_irq_enter() without a matching
> rcu_irq_exit() if the cpu is in rcu idle state, regarding the
> dynticks_nesting value. However, it seems not good to exit the rcu
> idle state, if we are actually entering into idle mode, so maybe it's
> better to call a matching rcu_irq_exit() before actually idle?
> As Frederic pointed out, we need a rcu_user_exit() to exit the user eqs
> (if we are in this state) in the beginning. But after some more
> thinking, I guess we might also need to call rcu_user_enter() after the
> waiting, if we get this page fault from user space. So maybe it's better
> to use rcu user eqs exception hooks here?

Makes sense.

> With rcu_user_exit() at the beginning, now rcu_irq_enter() only protects
> the cpu idle eqs, but it's not good to call rcu_irq_exit() after the cpu
> halt and the page ready.

Hmm, why is it not good?

> So I still want to remove it. And later if it shows that we really needs
> rcu somewhere in this code path, maybe we could use RCU_NONIDLE() to
> protect it. ( The suspicious RCU usage reported in commit
> c5e015d4949aa665 seems related to schedule(), which is not in the code
> path if we are in cpu idle eqs )

Yes but if rcu_irq_*() calls are fine to be called there, and I
believe they are because exception_enter() exits the user mode, we
should start to protect there right now instead of waiting for a
potential future warning of illegal RCU use.

> I think we still need Gleb's patch about the idle check in
> kvm_async_pf_task_wait(), and maybe another patch for the
> exit_idle()/enter_idle() issue.



 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-28 14:21    [W:0.106 / U:0.784 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site