From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, patches@linaro.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/14] rcu: Add ACCESS_ONCE() to ->qlen accesses
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:24:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120615222442.GO2389@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120615204500.GH31184@leaf>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 01:45:00PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 01:13:04PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
> >
> > The _rcu_barrier() function accesses other CPUs' rcu_data structure's
> > ->qlen field without benefit of locking. This commit therefore adds
> > the required ACCESS_ONCE() wrappers around accesses and updates that
> > need it.
>
> This type of restriction makes me wonder if we could add some kind of
> attribute to fields like qlen to make GCC or sparse help enforce this.
It is worth thinking about. Should spark some spirited discussions. ;-)
> > ACCESS_ONCE() is not needed when a CPU accesses its own ->qlen, or
> > in code that cannot run while _rcu_barrier() is sampling ->qlen fields.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Thank you!
Thanx, Paul
> > kernel/rcutree.c | 8 ++++----
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > index d938671..cdc101e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > @@ -1349,7 +1349,7 @@ rcu_send_cbs_to_orphanage(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp,
> > rsp->qlen += rdp->qlen;
> > rdp->n_cbs_orphaned += rdp->qlen;
> > rdp->qlen_lazy = 0;
> > - rdp->qlen = 0;
> > + ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->qlen) = 0;
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1597,7 +1597,7 @@ static void rcu_do_batch(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_data *rdp)
> > }
> > smp_mb(); /* List handling before counting for rcu_barrier(). */
> > rdp->qlen_lazy -= count_lazy;
> > - rdp->qlen -= count;
> > + ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->qlen) -= count;
> > rdp->n_cbs_invoked += count;
> >
> > /* Reinstate batch limit if we have worked down the excess. */
> > @@ -1886,7 +1886,7 @@ __call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void (*func)(struct rcu_head *rcu),
> > rdp = this_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda);
> >
> > /* Add the callback to our list. */
> > - rdp->qlen++;
> > + ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->qlen)++;
> > if (lazy)
> > rdp->qlen_lazy++;
> > else
> > @@ -2420,7 +2420,7 @@ rcu_boot_init_percpu_data(int cpu, struct rcu_state *rsp)
> > rdp->grpmask = 1UL << (cpu - rdp->mynode->grplo);
> > init_callback_list(rdp);
> > rdp->qlen_lazy = 0;
> > - rdp->qlen = 0;
> > + ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->qlen) = 0;
> > rdp->dynticks = &per_cpu(rcu_dynticks, cpu);
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(rdp->dynticks->dynticks_nesting != DYNTICK_TASK_EXIT_IDLE);
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks->dynticks) != 1);
> > --
> > 1.7.8
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-15 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-15 20:12 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/14] Fixups for 3.6 Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/14] rcu: Fix detection of abruptly-ending stall Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/14] rcu: Consolidate duplicate callback-list initialization Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:42 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/14] rcu: Add ACCESS_ONCE() to ->qlen accesses Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:45 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 22:24 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/14] rcu: Add a gcc-style structure initializer for RCU pointers Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:48 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 21:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 21:50 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 22:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/14] rcu: Use new INIT_RCU_POINTER for gcc-style initializations Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/14] rcu: Remove return value from RCU_INIT_POINTER() Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:50 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/14] key: Remove extraneous parentheses from rcu_assign_keypointer() Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:50 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/14] rcu: Remove return value from rcu_assign_pointer() Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:53 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/14] rcu: Consolidate tree/tiny __rcu_read_{,un}lock() implementations Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:59 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/14] rcu: Remove function versions of __kfree_rcu and __is_kfree_rcu_offset Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 20:59 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/14] rcu: Make __call_rcu() handle invocation from idle Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 21:02 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/14] rcu: Prevent __call_rcu() from invoking RCU core on offline CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 21:04 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/14] rcu: Split RCU core processing out of __call_rcu() Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 21:25 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/14] rcu: Fix rcu_is_cpu_idle() #ifdef in TINY_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 21:28 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 22:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-06-15 23:05 ` Josh Triplett
2012-06-15 20:40 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/14] rcu: Fix detection of abruptly-ending stall Josh Triplett
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=20120615222442.GO2389@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--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.