Re: INFO: rcu_sched detected stalls on CPUs/tasks with `kswapd` and `mem_cgroup_shrink_node`

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Wed Nov 30 2016 - 12:25:03 EST


On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:05:57PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 30-11-16 17:38:20, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:29:55AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > We can, and you are correct that cond_resched() does not unconditionally
> > > supply RCU quiescent states, and never has. Last time I tried to add
> > > cond_resched_rcu_qs() semantics to cond_resched(), I got told "no",
> > > but perhaps it is time to try again.
> >
> > Well, you got told: "ARRGH my benchmark goes all regress", or something
> > along those lines. Didn't we recently dig out those commits for some
> > reason or other?
> >
> > Finding out what benchmark that was and running it against this patch
> > would make sense.
> >
> > Also, I seem to have missed, why are we going through this again?
>
> Well, the point I've brought that up is because having basically two
> APIs for cond_resched is more than confusing. Basically all longer in
> kernel loops do cond_resched() but it seems that this will not help the
> silence RCU lockup detector in rare cases where nothing really wants to
> schedule. I am really not sure whether we want to sprinkle
> cond_resched_rcu_qs at random places just to silence RCU detector...

Just in case there is any doubt on this point, any patch of mine adding
cond_resched_rcu_qs() functionality to cond_resched() cannot go upstream
without Peter's Acked-by.

Or did you have some other solution in mind?

Thanx, Paul