srcu: Parallelize callback handling
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. ]
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment