Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 May 2014 19:41:33 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] irq_work: Architecture support for remote irq work raise |
| |
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 07:17:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 06:26:49PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 09:56:50AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 01:33:53AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > We are going to extend irq work to support remote queuing. > > > > > > > > So lets add a cpu argument to arch_irq_work_raise(). The architectures > > > > willing to support that must then provide the backend to raise irq work > > > > IPIs remotely. > > > > > > > > Initial support is provided for x86 and ARM since they are easily > > > > extended. The other archs that overwrite arch_irq_work_raise() seem > > > > to use local clock interrupts and therefore need deeper rewrite of their > > > > irq work support to implement remote raising. > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> > > > > > > Why not borrow the smp_call_function IPI for the remote bits? We could > > > limit the 'safe from NMI' to the local works. And we validate this by > > > putting a WARN_ON(in_nmi()) in irq_work_queue_on(). > > > > Right, but although I don't need it to be safe from NMI, I need it > > to be callable concurrently and when irqs are disabled. > > > > So we can't use smp_call_function_single() for that. But we can use the async > > version in which case we must keep the irq work claim. But that's > > about the same than smp_queue_function_single() we had previously > > and we are back with our csd_lock issue. > > Who said anything about using smp_call_function_single()?
Ah shortcutting, doesn't look bad indeed.
> > > --- > diff --git a/kernel/irq_work.c b/kernel/irq_work.c > index a82170e2fa78..2fc9d8ece05a 100644 > --- a/kernel/irq_work.c > +++ b/kernel/irq_work.c > @@ -61,7 +61,8 @@ void __weak arch_irq_work_raise(void) > * > * Can be re-enqueued while the callback is still in progress. > */ > -bool irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *work) > +static __always_inline bool > +__irq_work_queue_on(struct irq_work *work, int cpu) > { > /* Only queue if not already pending */ > if (!irq_work_claim(work)) > @@ -78,16 +79,31 @@ bool irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *work) > * for the next tick. > */ > if (!(work->flags & IRQ_WORK_LAZY) || tick_nohz_tick_stopped()) { > - if (!this_cpu_cmpxchg(irq_work_raised, 0, 1)) > - arch_irq_work_raise(); > + if (cmpxchg(&__get_cpu_var(irq_work_raised, 0, 1) == 0)) { > + if (cpu == smp_processor_id() || cpu == -1) > + arch_irq_work_raise(); > + else > + arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(); > + }
Ok that needs some more tuning with the raised flag and the destination list to pick, but I get the idea.
> } > > preempt_enable(); > > return true; > } > + > +bool irq_work_queue(struct irq_work *work) > +{ > + return __irq_work_queue_on(work, -1); > +} > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_work_queue); > > +bool irq_work_queue_on(struct irq_work *work, int cpu) > +{ > + WARN_ON_ONCE(in_nmi()); > + return __irq_work_queue_on(work, cpu); > +} > + > bool irq_work_needs_cpu(void) > { > struct llist_head *this_list; > diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c > index 06d574e42c72..0fd53963c4fb 100644 > --- a/kernel/smp.c > +++ b/kernel/smp.c > @@ -198,6 +198,12 @@ void generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(void) > csd->func(csd->info); > csd_unlock(csd); > } > + > + /* > + * First run the synchronous callbacks, people are waiting on them; > + * then run the async ones. > + */ > + irq_work_run(); > }
Alright, I'm reiterating with that.
Thanks.
| |