Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Sunday, August 24, 2008 - 10:09 am

On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 10:16:17AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:

No problem!


I believe that it has indeed passed on.

I have occasional access to some 128-CPU machines, but they both
currently being used for a week-long test sequence, so I won't have
access to them for some time.  Once they free up, I would be happy to
run some short (a few hours) tests on them, given a patch stack starting
from a Linux release (e.g., 2.6.27-rc1).  Given such a patch stack, I
can simply point the machine at it.  The automated test system doesn't
yet understand git trees.  :-/

My hope is that the SGI guys take a look, as they have truly huge
machines.


It does indeed optimize a few situations.  I expect to be able to get a
few more, for example, call_rcu() can probably check to see if the
current grace period is running, though it mean touching the rcu_state
structure.


Ah, OK -- having the quiescent states for both phases would seem to
handle it.


OK, I think.  ;-)

I will look your update over later -- the question is "how do the CPUs
know when a grace period has started?"  If this question can be answered
with no temporal uncertainty, then we are set.


Yep.  Not yet sure whether this is good or bad in my patch.


Yep, that is the general RCU approach for quiescent states.  ;-)


Sounds like a reasonable strategy.


Ah!  I was interpreting "Bla Bla Bla" as "#error".


OK, seems reasonable.  I should also put a cpu_quiet() into
rcu_enter_nohz() and friends.  Still need to sample state for CPUs that
remain in NO_HZ idle for the entire grace period, but still would help.


I will look it over!

							Thanx, Paul


Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Manfred Spraul, (Thu Aug 21, 8:27 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Manfred Spraul, (Thu Aug 21, 8:29 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Manfred Spraul, (Thu Aug 21, 8:32 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Paul E. McKenney, (Fri Aug 22, 12:02 pm)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Manfred Spraul, (Sat Aug 23, 1:16 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Paul E. McKenney, (Sun Aug 24, 10:09 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Paul E. McKenney, (Tue Aug 26, 9:08 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Manfred Spraul, (Tue Aug 26, 10:19 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Paul E. McKenney, (Tue Aug 26, 11:13 am)
Re: [RFC, PATCH] state machine based rcu, Randy Dunlap, (Tue Sep 30, 5:02 pm)