All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
	linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu: use read_seqbegin() rather than read_seqbegin_or_lock()
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 14:18:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231116131849.GA27763@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231027095842.GA30868@redhat.com>

David, Al,

So do you agree that

	- the usage of read_seqbegin_or_lock/need_seqretry in
	  this code makes no sense because read_seqlock_excl()
	  is not possible

	- this patch doesn't change the current behaviour but
	  simplifies the code and makes it more clear

?

On 10/27, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> read_seqbegin_or_lock() makes no sense unless you make "seq" odd
> after the lockless access failed. See thread_group_cputime() as
> an example, note that it does nextseq = 1 for the 2nd round.
> 
> So this code can use read_seqbegin() without changing the current
> behaviour.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> ---
>  net/rxrpc/conn_service.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c b/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> index 89ac05a711a4..bfafe58681d9 100644
> --- a/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> +++ b/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  	struct rxrpc_conn_proto k;
>  	struct rxrpc_skb_priv *sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
>  	struct rb_node *p;
> -	unsigned int seq = 0;
> +	unsigned int seq;
>  
>  	k.epoch	= sp->hdr.epoch;
>  	k.cid	= sp->hdr.cid & RXRPC_CIDMASK;
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  		 * under just the RCU read lock, so we have to check for
>  		 * changes.
>  		 */
> -		read_seqbegin_or_lock(&peer->service_conn_lock, &seq);
> +		seq = read_seqbegin(&peer->service_conn_lock);
>  
>  		p = rcu_dereference_raw(peer->service_conns.rb_node);
>  		while (p) {
> @@ -49,9 +49,8 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  				break;
>  			conn = NULL;
>  		}
> -	} while (need_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq));
> +	} while (read_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq));
>  
> -	done_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq);
>  	_leave(" = %d", conn ? conn->debug_id : -1);
>  	return conn;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.25.1.362.g51ebf55
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-11-16 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-27  9:58 [PATCH] rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu: use read_seqbegin() rather than read_seqbegin_or_lock() Oleg Nesterov
2023-10-27 10:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 15:45 ` David Howells
2023-11-01 20:23   ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 20:40     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 21:22       ` David Howells
2023-11-01 22:38         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 20:52     ` Al Viro
2023-11-01 21:52       ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 22:48         ` Al Viro
2023-11-01 23:17           ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 21:20     ` David Howells
2023-11-01 22:15       ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 22:29         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-16 13:18 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2023-11-16 13:41   ` David Howells
2023-11-16 14:19     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-16 15:02       ` David Howells
2023-11-16 15:06         ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20231116131849.GA27763@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.dionne@auristor.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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.