All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:49:51 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051210151951.GA2798@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4399D852.47E0BB4E@tv-sign.ru>

On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 10:17:38PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:31:06PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > I can't see how this change can prevent idle cpus to be included in
> > > ->cpumask, cpu can add itself to nohz_cpu_mask right after some other
> > > cpu started new grace period.
> > 
> > Yes that can happen, but if they check for rcu_pending right after that
> > it will prevent them from going tickless atleast (which will prevent grace
> > periods from being unnecessarily extended). Something like below:
> > 
> >         CPU0                                    CPU1
> > 
> >         rcp->cur++;     /* New GP */
> > 
> >         smp_mb();
> 
> I think I need some education on memory barriers.
> 
> Does this mb() garantees that the new value of ->cur will be visible
> on other cpus immediately after smp_mb() (so that rcu_pending() will
> notice it) ?

AFAIK the new value of ->cur should be visible to other CPUs when smp_mb() 
returns. Here's a definition of smp_mb() from Paul's article:

smp_mb(): "memory barrier" that orders both loads and stores. This means loads 
and stores preceding the memory barrier are committed to memory before any 
loads and stores following the memory barrier.

[ http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8211 ]

> My understanding is that it only garantees that all stores before it
> must be visible before any store after mb. (yes, mb implies rmb, but
> I think it does not matter if CPU1 adds itself to nonhz mask after
> CPU0 reads nohz_cpu_mask). This means that CPU1 can read the stale
> value of ->cur. I guess I am wrong, but I can't prove it to myself.
> 
> Could you please clarify this?
> 
> Even simpler question:
> 
> CPU0
> 	var = 1;
> 	wmb();
> 
> after that CPU1 does rmb().
> 
> Does it garantees that CPU1 will see the new value of var?

Again, going by the above article, I would expect CPU1 to see the new value of 
var.


-- 


Thanks and Regards,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri,
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Labs,
Bangalore, INDIA - 560017

  reply	other threads:[~2005-12-10 15:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-12-08 19:31 [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-09  2:46 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-09 19:17   ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-10 15:19     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri [this message]
2005-12-10 18:55       ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-11 17:41         ` Semantics of smp_mb() [was : Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask ] Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-11 21:21           ` Andrew James Wade
2005-12-11 23:45             ` Rusty Russell
2005-12-12  0:49               ` Keith Owens
2005-12-12  8:41                 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-12 19:33                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-13  5:20                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13  5:07               ` Andrew James Wade
2005-12-13  5:43                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13 11:20                 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-13 16:20                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13 22:27                     ` Keith Owens
2005-12-13 22:50                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-14  1:12                         ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-14  1:46                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-15 21:15                       ` Semantics of smp_mb() Roland Dreier
2005-12-16  7:46                       ` Semantics of smp_mb() [was : Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask ] Jeremy Higdon
2006-03-13 18:39                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2006-03-31  4:56                           ` Jeremy Higdon
2006-03-31  6:18                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2006-03-31 23:38                             ` Jesse Barnes
2005-12-12  3:10         ` [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-12  4:32           ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-12  4:38             ` David S. Miller
2005-12-12  4:47               ` Nick Piggin
2005-12-12  4:49             ` Paul Mackerras
2005-12-12  6:27             ` Keith Owens
2005-12-09  2:56 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-12-05 11:02 Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-08  0:37 ` Andrew Morton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20051210151951.GA2798@in.ibm.com \
    --to=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.