Commit fae4b54f authored by Paul E. McKenney's avatar Paul E. McKenney Committed by Paul E. McKenney

rcu: Introduce rcutorture testing for rcu_barrier()

Although rcutorture does invoke rcu_barrier() and friends, it cannot
really be called a torture test given that it invokes them only once
at the end of the test.  This commit therefore introduces heavy-duty
rcutorture testing for rcu_barrier(), which may be carried out
concurrently with normal rcutorture testing.
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
parent 37e377d2
...@@ -47,6 +47,16 @@ irqreader Says to invoke RCU readers from irq level. This is currently ...@@ -47,6 +47,16 @@ irqreader Says to invoke RCU readers from irq level. This is currently
permit this. (Or, more accurately, variants of RCU that do permit this. (Or, more accurately, variants of RCU that do
-not- permit this know to ignore this variable.) -not- permit this know to ignore this variable.)
n_barrier_cbs If this is nonzero, RCU barrier testing will be conducted,
in which case n_barrier_cbs specifies the number of
RCU callbacks (and corresponding kthreads) to use for
this testing. The value cannot be negative. If you
specify this to be non-zero when torture_type indicates a
synchronous RCU implementation (one for which a member of
the synchronize_rcu() rather than the call_rcu() family is
used -- see the documentation for torture_type below), an
error will be reported and no testing will be carried out.
nfakewriters This is the number of RCU fake writer threads to run. Fake nfakewriters This is the number of RCU fake writer threads to run. Fake
writer threads repeatedly use the synchronous "wait for writer threads repeatedly use the synchronous "wait for
current readers" function of the interface selected by current readers" function of the interface selected by
...@@ -188,7 +198,7 @@ OUTPUT ...@@ -188,7 +198,7 @@ OUTPUT
The statistics output is as follows: The statistics output is as follows:
rcu-torture:--- Start of test: nreaders=16 nfakewriters=4 stat_interval=30 verbose=0 test_no_idle_hz=1 shuffle_interval=3 stutter=5 irqreader=1 fqs_duration=0 fqs_holdoff=0 fqs_stutter=3 test_boost=1/0 test_boost_interval=7 test_boost_duration=4 rcu-torture:--- Start of test: nreaders=16 nfakewriters=4 stat_interval=30 verbose=0 test_no_idle_hz=1 shuffle_interval=3 stutter=5 irqreader=1 fqs_duration=0 fqs_holdoff=0 fqs_stutter=3 test_boost=1/0 test_boost_interval=7 test_boost_duration=4
rcu-torture: rtc: (null) ver: 155441 tfle: 0 rta: 155441 rtaf: 8884 rtf: 155440 rtmbe: 0 rtbke: 0 rtbre: 0 rtbf: 0 rtb: 0 nt: 3055767 rcu-torture: rtc: (null) ver: 155441 tfle: 0 rta: 155441 rtaf: 8884 rtf: 155440 rtmbe: 0 rtbe: 0 rtbke: 0 rtbre: 0 rtbf: 0 rtb: 0 nt: 3055767
rcu-torture: Reader Pipe: 727860534 34213 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rcu-torture: Reader Pipe: 727860534 34213 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
rcu-torture: Reader Batch: 727877838 17003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rcu-torture: Reader Batch: 727877838 17003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
rcu-torture: Free-Block Circulation: 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 0 rcu-torture: Free-Block Circulation: 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 155440 0
...@@ -230,6 +240,9 @@ o "rtmbe": A non-zero value indicates that rcutorture believes that ...@@ -230,6 +240,9 @@ o "rtmbe": A non-zero value indicates that rcutorture believes that
rcu_assign_pointer() and rcu_dereference() are not working rcu_assign_pointer() and rcu_dereference() are not working
correctly. This value should be zero. correctly. This value should be zero.
o "rtbe": A non-zero value indicates that one of the rcu_barrier()
family of functions is not working correctly.
o "rtbke": rcutorture was unable to create the real-time kthreads o "rtbke": rcutorture was unable to create the real-time kthreads
used to force RCU priority inversion. This value should be zero. used to force RCU priority inversion. This value should be zero.
......
This diff is collapsed.
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment