From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, matthltc@us.ibm.com,
dipankar@in.ibm.com, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, mingo@elte.hu,
tytso@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, jes@sgi.com,
dhowells@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] srcu-3: RCU variant permitting read-side blocking
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:19:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060711141930.GA1288@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44B29212.1070301@yahoo.com.au>
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 03:44:50AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 03:50:29AM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> >>As I see it, 1) + 2) is NOT enough for synchronize_srcu() to be correct
> >>(the 2-nd and 3-rd synchronize_sched() calls). I think synchronize_sched()
> >>should also guarantee the completion of mem ops on all CPUs before return,
> >>not just mb() (which does not have any timing guaranties).
> >>
> >>Could you clarify this issue?
> >>
> >>(Again, I do not see any problems with the current RCU implementation).
> >
> >
> >However, this -does- seem to be to be a problem with the comment headers
> >and the documentation. Does the following patch make things better?
> >
> >David, would it be worthwhile adding this global-memory-barrier effect
> >of synchronize_rcu(), synchronize_sched(), and synchronize_srcu() to
>
> And call_rcu? (or is that already tucked away in the documentation
> somewhere?) ie. there is a memory barrier between the call_rcu() call
> and the actual callback.
>
> This is something I needed clarification with (as you might remember),
> which might not be clear from an RCU API user's point of view.
Good point -- since synchronize_rcu() is just a wrapper around call_rcu(),
they do have the same properties. How about the following?
Thanx, Paul
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 4 +++-
include/linux/srcu.h | 5 +++++
kernel/rcupdate.c | 4 ++++
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-5/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-6/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
--- linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-5/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt 2006-07-10 09:43:19.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-6/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt 2006-07-11 07:12:25.000000000 -0700
@@ -224,4 +224,6 @@ over a rather long period of time, but i
14. The synchronize_rcu(), synchronize_sched(), and synchronize_srcu()
primitives force at least one memory barrier to be executed on
- each active CPU before they return.
+ each active CPU before they return. Similarly, call_rcu()
+ forces at least one memory barrier to be executed on each active
+ CPU before the corresponding callback is invoked.
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-5/kernel/rcupdate.c linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-6/kernel/rcupdate.c
--- linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-5/kernel/rcupdate.c 2006-07-10 09:48:32.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.17-srcu-LKML-6/kernel/rcupdate.c 2006-07-11 07:11:07.000000000 -0700
@@ -116,6 +116,10 @@ static inline void force_quiescent_state
* read-side critical sections have completed. RCU read-side critical
* sections are delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(),
* and may be nested.
+ *
+ * There will be at least one memory barrier executed on each active
+ * CPU between the time call_rcu() is invoked and the time that the
+ * corresponding callback is invoked.
*/
void fastcall call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-11 14:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-06 17:14 [PATCH 0/2] srcu-3: add RCU variant that permits read-side blocking Paul E. McKenney
2006-07-06 17:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] srcu-3: RCU variant permitting " Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <20060709235029.GA194@oleg>
2006-07-10 16:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <44B29212.1070301@yahoo.com.au>
2006-07-11 14:19 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2006-07-06 17:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] srcu-3: add SRCU operations to rcutorture Paul E. McKenney
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0607061603320.5768-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
[not found] ` <1152226204.21787.2093.camel@stark>
2006-07-06 23:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] srcu-3: RCU variant permitting read-side blocking Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0607071051430.17135-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
2006-07-07 16:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0607071345270.6793-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
2006-07-07 18:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2006-07-07 19:59 ` Alan Stern
2006-07-07 21:11 ` Matt Helsley
2006-07-07 21:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] <20060711172530.GA93@oleg>
2006-07-11 14:56 ` Alan Stern
2006-07-11 18:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20060711141930.GA1288@us.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=tytso@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.