All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney"
	<paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
	netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	dougthompson-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
	bluesmoke-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
	axboe-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org,
	"Patrick McHardy" <kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>,
	christine.caulfield-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org,
	Trond.Myklebust-HgOvQuBEEgTQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org,
	yoshfuji-VfPWfsRibaP+Ru+s062T9g@public.gmane.org,
	shemminger-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	neilb-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org,
	linux-ext4-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	tytso-3s7WtUTddSA@public.gmane.org,
	adilger-xsfywfwIY+M@public.gmane.org,
	netfilter-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: [PATCH 08/10] edac_core: Uses call_rcu() and its own wait_for_completion scheme.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:04:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090623150434.22490.18824.stgit@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150330.22490.87327.stgit@localhost>

Module edac_core.ko uses call_rcu() callbacks in edac_device.c, edac_mc.c
and edac_pci.c.

They all uses a wait_for_completion scheme, but this scheme it not 100%
safe on multiple CPUs.  See the _rcu_barrier() implementation which explains
why extra precausion is needed.

The patch adds a comment about rcu_barrier() and as a precausion calls
rcu_barrier().  A maintainer needs to look at removing the wait_for_completion
code.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>
---

 drivers/edac/edac_device.c |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_mc.c     |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_pci.c    |    5 +++++
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
index b02a6a6..5e831c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
@@ -373,6 +373,11 @@ static void del_edac_device_from_global_list(struct edac_device_ctl_info
 	init_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
 	call_rcu(&edac_device->rcu, complete_edac_device_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
index 335b7eb..edcce41 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
@@ -428,6 +428,11 @@ static void del_mc_from_global_list(struct mem_ctl_info *mci)
 	init_completion(&mci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&mci->rcu, complete_mc_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&mci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /**
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
index 30b585b..d0eb8c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
@@ -188,6 +188,11 @@ static void del_edac_pci_from_global_list(struct edac_pci_ctl_info *pci)
 	init_completion(&pci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&pci->rcu, complete_edac_pci_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&pci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 #if 0

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dougthompson@xmission.com, bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	axboe@kernel.dk, "Patrick McHardy" <kaber@trash.net>,
	christine.caulfield@googlemail.com, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net,
	yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org, neilb@suse.de,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
	adilger-xsfywfwIY+M@public.gmane.org,
	netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 08/10] edac_core: Uses call_rcu() and its own wait_for_completion scheme.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:04:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090623150434.22490.18824.stgit@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150330.22490.87327.stgit@localhost>

Module edac_core.ko uses call_rcu() callbacks in edac_device.c, edac_mc.c
and edac_pci.c.

They all uses a wait_for_completion scheme, but this scheme it not 100%
safe on multiple CPUs.  See the _rcu_barrier() implementation which explains
why extra precausion is needed.

The patch adds a comment about rcu_barrier() and as a precausion calls
rcu_barrier().  A maintainer needs to look at removing the wait_for_completion
code.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org>
---

 drivers/edac/edac_device.c |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_mc.c     |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_pci.c    |    5 +++++
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
index b02a6a6..5e831c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
@@ -373,6 +373,11 @@ static void del_edac_device_from_global_list(struct edac_device_ctl_info
 	init_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
 	call_rcu(&edac_device->rcu, complete_edac_device_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
index 335b7eb..edcce41 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
@@ -428,6 +428,11 @@ static void del_mc_from_global_list(struct mem_ctl_info *mci)
 	init_completion(&mci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&mci->rcu, complete_mc_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&mci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /**
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
index 30b585b..d0eb8c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
@@ -188,6 +188,11 @@ static void del_edac_pci_from_global_list(struct edac_pci_ctl_info *pci)
 	init_completion(&pci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&pci->rcu, complete_edac_pci_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&pci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk-4UpuNZONu4c@public.gmane.org 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 #if 0


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dougthompson@xmission.com, bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	axboe@kernel.dk, "Patrick McHardy" <kaber@trash.net>,
	christine.caulfield@googlemail.com, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net,
	yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org, neilb@suse.de,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, adilger@sun.com,
	netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 08/10] edac_core: Uses call_rcu() and its own wait_for_completion scheme.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:04:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090623150434.22490.18824.stgit@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150330.22490.87327.stgit@localhost>

Module edac_core.ko uses call_rcu() callbacks in edac_device.c, edac_mc.c
and edac_pci.c.

They all uses a wait_for_completion scheme, but this scheme it not 100%
safe on multiple CPUs.  See the _rcu_barrier() implementation which explains
why extra precausion is needed.

The patch adds a comment about rcu_barrier() and as a precausion calls
rcu_barrier().  A maintainer needs to look at removing the wait_for_completion
code.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>
---

 drivers/edac/edac_device.c |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_mc.c     |    5 +++++
 drivers/edac/edac_pci.c    |    5 +++++
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
index b02a6a6..5e831c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_device.c
@@ -373,6 +373,11 @@ static void del_edac_device_from_global_list(struct edac_device_ctl_info
 	init_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
 	call_rcu(&edac_device->rcu, complete_edac_device_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&edac_device->removal_complete);
+
+	/* hawk@comx.dk 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
index 335b7eb..edcce41 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_mc.c
@@ -428,6 +428,11 @@ static void del_mc_from_global_list(struct mem_ctl_info *mci)
 	init_completion(&mci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&mci->rcu, complete_mc_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&mci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk@comx.dk 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 /**
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
index 30b585b..d0eb8c9 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_pci.c
@@ -188,6 +188,11 @@ static void del_edac_pci_from_global_list(struct edac_pci_ctl_info *pci)
 	init_completion(&pci->complete);
 	call_rcu(&pci->rcu, complete_edac_pci_list_del);
 	wait_for_completion(&pci->complete);
+
+	/* hawk@comx.dk 2009-06-22: I think that rcu_barrier() should
+	 *  be used instead of wait_for_completion, because
+	 *  rcu_barrier() take multiple CPUs into account */
+	rcu_barrier();
 }
 
 #if 0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-06-23 15:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-23 15:03 [PATCH 00/10] We must use rcu_barrier() on module unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:03 ` [PATCH 01/10] ext4: Use " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-07-06  2:31   ` Theodore Tso
2009-07-06  2:31     ` Theodore Tso
2009-07-06  2:31     ` Theodore Tso
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 02/10] bridge: Use rcu_barrier() instead of syncronize_net() on unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 03/10] mac80211: Use rcu_barrier() " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:15   ` Johannes Berg
     [not found]     ` <1245770155.21314.38.camel-YfaajirXv2244ywRPIzf9A@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-24 10:06       ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 10:06         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 10:06         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 10:21         ` Johannes Berg
     [not found]           ` <1245838862.21314.48.camel-YfaajirXv2244ywRPIzf9A@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-24 11:32             ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 11:32               ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 11:32               ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 11:39               ` Johannes Berg
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 04/10] sunrpc: " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 16:59   ` Trond Myklebust
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 05/10] nfs: Use rcu_barrier() on module unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 06/10] ipv6: " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 07/10] decnet: " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24  6:23   ` Chrissie Caulfield
2009-06-24 11:44     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
     [not found]       ` <1245843884.6695.54.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-24 12:09         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 12:09           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 12:09           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
     [not found]           ` <1245845367.24921.3.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-24 13:50             ` Chrissie Caulfield
2009-06-24 13:50               ` Chrissie Caulfield
2009-06-24 13:50               ` Chrissie Caulfield
     [not found]               ` <5A680E0A-EFEB-44EA-9F06-F338E6CBD6D1-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-25 11:52                 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25 11:52                   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25 11:52                   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
     [not found]                   ` <1245930729.24921.67.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-25 23:10                     ` David Miller
2009-06-25 23:10                       ` David Miller
2009-06-25 23:10                       ` David Miller
     [not found]                       ` <20090625.161046.19938291.davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-26 19:18                         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-26 19:18                           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-26 19:18                           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-27  3:15                           ` Christian Kujau
2009-06-27  7:35                             ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2009-06-23 15:04   ` [PATCH 08/10] edac_core: Uses call_rcu() and its own wait_for_completion scheme Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 09/10] cfq-iosched: Uses its own open-coded rcu_barrier Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24  6:42   ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-24  6:42     ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-24  6:42     ` Jens Axboe
     [not found]     ` <20090624064236.GE31415-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-24 14:05       ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24 14:05         ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24 14:05         ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 10/10] nf_conntrack: Use rcu_barrier() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 15:04   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-23 16:23   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-24  9:02     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24  9:40       ` [PATCH v2 10/10] nf_conntrack: Use rcu_barrier() and fix kmem_cache_create flags Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-24 13:58         ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25  9:29           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25  9:29             ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25 10:02             ` [PATCH v3 10/10] nf_conntrack: Use rcu_barrier() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25 10:02               ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-25 14:33               ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25 14:33                 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25 13:59             ` [PATCH v2 10/10] nf_conntrack: Use rcu_barrier() and fix kmem_cache_create flags Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25 13:59               ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25 19:32             ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-25 19:32               ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24  1:44 ` [PATCH 00/10] We must use rcu_barrier() on module unload Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24  1:44   ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24  1:44   ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-24  7:02 ` David Miller

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=20090623150434.22490.18824.stgit@localhost \
    --to=hawk-4upunzonu4c@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust-HgOvQuBEEgTQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=adilger-xsfywfwIY+M@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=axboe-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=bluesmoke-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=christine.caulfield-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=dougthompson-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=neilb-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=shemminger-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=tytso-3s7WtUTddSA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=yoshfuji-VfPWfsRibaP+Ru+s062T9g@public.gmane.org \
    /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.