BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
Cc: "Lai Jiangshan" <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	"Josh Triplett" <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	"Onur Özkan" <work@onurozkan.dev>,
	"Frederic Weisbecker" <frederic@kernel.org>,
	"Neeraj Upadhyay" <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	"Joel Fernandes" <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
	"Boqun Feng" <boqun@kernel.org>,
	"Uladzislau Rezki" <urezki@gmail.com>,
	"Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
	"Eduard Zingerman" <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" <memxor@gmail.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	"Song Liu" <song@kernel.org>,
	"Yonghong Song" <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	"Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	"Emil Tsalapatis" <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	"Matt Fleming" <mfleming@cloudflare.com>,
	"Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] rcu: Make call_rcu() safe to call from any context
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 16:46:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260826144636.3IRUXeFV@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260810122758.183765-2-puranjay@kernel.org>

On 2026-08-10 05:27:50 [-0700], Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> --- a/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/rcu.h
> @@ -572,6 +572,17 @@ static inline void tasks_cblist_init_generic(void) { }
>  #define RCU_SCHEDULER_INIT	1
>  #define RCU_SCHEDULER_RUNNING	2
>  
> +/*
> + * Defer whenever interrupts are disabled, since a callback-list operation may
> + * be in flight on this CPU.  Not before the scheduler is up: irq_work is not
> + * usable that early, and rcu_init() itself calls call_rcu().
> + */
> +static inline bool should_rcu_defer(void)
> +{
> +	return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_DEFER) && irqs_disabled() &&
> +	       rcu_scheduler_active != RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE;
> +}

Why does the description say that the defer part is for usage from NMI
and the test here has irqs_disabled() instead of in_nmi()?

> +
>  enum rcutorture_type {
>  	RCU_FLAVOR,
>  	RCU_TASKS_FLAVOR,
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 21b6ce1dffb63..3bf3a250f9de8 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -3206,6 +3204,103 @@ __call_rcu_common(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func, bool lazy_in)
>  	local_irq_restore(flags);
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Re-issue deferred callbacks straight to the enqueue so they cannot defer
> + * again.  ->defer_lock serializes the drainers: this CPU's irq_work,
> + * rcu_defer_flush() and rcutree_migrate_callbacks().
> + */
> +static void __rcu_defer_drain(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> +{
> +	struct llist_node *node, *next;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_DEFER))
> +		return;
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rdp->defer_lock, flags);
> +	llist_for_each_safe(node, next, llist_del_all(&rdp->defer_head)) {
> +		struct rcu_head *head = (struct rcu_head *)node;

Why do you need the lock. This is still not clear to me despite the
comment. You can do llist_del_all() towards another list and then feed
it into rcu_do_enqueue() one by one. And you use the LAZY part.

> +
> +		/* Bounds a node self-linked by a double call_rcu(). */
> +		head->next = NULL;
> +		rcu_do_enqueue(head, head->func, false);
> +	}
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rdp->defer_lock, flags);
> +}
> @@ -4231,6 +4330,9 @@ rcu_boot_init_percpu_data(int cpu)
>  	rdp->rcu_onl_gp_state = RCU_GP_CLEANED;
>  	rdp->last_sched_clock = jiffies;
>  	rdp->cpu = cpu;
> +	init_llist_head(&rdp->defer_head);
> +	raw_spin_lock_init(&rdp->defer_lock);
> +	rdp->defer_work = IRQ_WORK_INIT_HARD(rcu_defer_drain);

Why is this IRQ_WORK_INIT_HARD() instead, say, IRQ_WORK_INIT_LAZY()? Is
there a requirement that the RCU callback needs to complete asap and not
be delayed to the next tick? This would give kind of the LAZY part.

>  	rcu_boot_init_nocb_percpu_data(rdp);
>  }
>  

Sebastian

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-26 14:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-10 12:27 [PATCH v4 0/6] rcu,srcu: Make call_rcu()/call_srcu() safe from any context Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] rcu: Make call_rcu() safe to call " Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 12:48     ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-26 14:46   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] rcu: Make Tiny " Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 12:45     ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] srcu: Make call_srcu() " Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] srcu: Make Tiny " Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] rcutorture: Exercise ->call() from NMI context Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-10 12:27 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] selftests/bpf: Add a call_srcu() re-entry reproducer Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-12  0:10 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] rcu,srcu: Make call_rcu()/call_srcu() safe from any context 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=20260826144636.3IRUXeFV@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=boqun@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=harry@kernel.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=mfleming@cloudflare.com \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=puranjay@kernel.org \
    --cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=work@onurozkan.dev \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox