From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com,
dipankar@in.ibm.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, dvhltc@us.ibm.com,
niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, adobriyan@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] rcu head debugobjects
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:53:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100329145329.GA2569@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100329133933.GA23238@Krystal>
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 09:39:33AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thinking about the rcu head init topic, we might be able to drop the
> init_rcu_head() initializer. The idea is the following:
>
> - We need init_rcu_head_on_stack()/destroy_rcu_head_on_stack().
> - call_rcu() populates the rcu_head and normally does not care about it being
> pre-initialized.
> - The activation fixup can detect if a non-initialized rcu head is being
> activated and just perform the fixup without complaining.
> - If we have two call_rcu() in a row in the same GP on the same rcu_head, the
> activation check will detect it.
>
> So either we remove all the init_rcu_head(), as was originally proposed, or we
> use one that is a no-op on !DEBUG configs and initialize the object with DEBUG
> configs.
>
> That removes the dependency on object_is_static().
If I understand correctly, this does sound good. Here is what I think
you are proposing:
o call_rcu() and friends only complain if handed an rcu_head
structure that is still queued awaiting a grace period.
They don't care otherwise.
o rcu_do_batch() complains unless the rcu_head structure has
most recently been enqueued by call_rcu() or one if its friends.
Did I get it right?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-29 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-27 15:32 [patch 0/6] rcu head debugobjects Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 1/6] commit 501fdb3aeeb2444f86d289a4a044cf7c8fbc17df Author: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Date: Sat Mar 27 10:52:11 2010 -0400 Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 2/6] commit afd066d60b77e28651bb8323fc8cfcedacc5cbf8 Author: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Date: Sat Mar 27 10:53:30 " Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 3/6] commit 418b6f2c2ddba7c91d1186b68618092910260c32 Author: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Date: Sat Mar 27 11:05:38 " Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 4/6] Debugobjects transition check Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 5/6] tree/tiny rcu: Add debug RCU head objects (v4) Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:32 ` [patch 6/6] kernel call_rcu usage: initialize rcu_head structures (v2) Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 15:40 ` [patch 0/6] rcu head debugobjects David Miller
2010-03-27 22:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-27 23:14 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 23:20 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-27 23:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-28 0:02 ` [RFC patch] extable and module add object is static Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-28 0:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 1:39 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-03-29 3:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-29 8:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-29 13:16 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-29 13:55 ` Tejun Heo
2010-03-29 14:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-29 13:39 ` [patch 0/6] rcu head debugobjects Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-29 14:53 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-03-29 15:04 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-03-29 16:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-28 2:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-28 4:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 0:45 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=20100329145329.GA2569@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.