Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/4] Forbid static SRCU use in modules

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck-tEXmvtCZX7AybS5Ee8rs3A@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:27:42AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Apr 3, 2019, at 9:32 AM, paulmck paulmck-tEXmvtCZX7AybS5Ee8rs3A@public.gmane.org wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:34:07AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> ----- On Apr 2, 2019, at 11:23 AM, paulmck paulmck-tEXmvtCZX7AybS5Ee8rs3A@public.gmane.org wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:14:40AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> >> ----- On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:28 AM, paulmck paulmck-tEXmvtCZX7AybS5Ee8rs3A@public.gmane.org wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > Hello!
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > This series prohibits use of DEFINE_SRCU() and DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU()
> >> >> > by loadable modules.  The reason for this prohibition is the fact
> >> >> > that using these two macros within modules requires that the size of
> >> >> > the reserved region be increased, which is not something we want to
> >> >> > be doing all that often.  Instead, loadable modules should define an
> >> >> > srcu_struct and invoke init_srcu_struct() from their module_init function
> >> >> > and cleanup_srcu_struct() from their module_exit function.  Note that
> >> >> > modules using call_srcu() will also need to invoke srcu_barrier() from
> >> >> > their module_exit function.
> >> >> 
> >> >> This arbitrary API limitation seems weird.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Isn't there a way to allow modules to use DEFINE_SRCU and DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU
> >> >> while implementing them with dynamic allocation under the hood ?
> >> > 
> >> > Although call_srcu() already has initialization hooks, some would
> >> > also be required in srcu_read_lock(), and I am concerned about adding
> >> > memory allocation at that point, especially given the possibility
> >> > of memory-allocation failure.  And the possibility that the first
> >> > srcu_read_lock() happens in an interrupt handler or similar.
> >> > 
> >> > Or am I missing a trick here?
> >> 
> >> I was more thinking that under #ifdef MODULE, both DEFINE_SRCU and
> >> DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU could append data in a dedicated section. module.c
> >> would additionally lookup that section on module load, and deal with
> >> those statically defined SRCU entries as if they were dynamically
> >> allocated ones. It would of course cleanup those resources on module
> >> unload.
> >> 
> >> Am I missing some subtlety there ?
> > 
> > If I understand you correctly, that is actually what is already done.  The
> > size of this dedicated section is currently set by PERCPU_MODULE_RESERVE,
> > and the additions of DEFINE{_STATIC}_SRCU() in modules was requiring that
> > this to be increased frequently.  That led to a request that something
> > be done, in turn leading to this patch series.
> 
> I think we are not expressing quite the same idea.
> 
> AFAIU, yours is to have DEFINE*_SRCU directly define per-cpu data within modules,
> which ends up using percpu module reserved memory.
> 
> My idea is to make DEFINE*_SRCU have a different behavior under #ifdef MODULE.
> It could emit a _global variable_ (_not_ per-cpu) within a new section. That
> section would then be used by module init/exit code to figure out what "srcu
> descriptors" are present in the modules. It would therefore rely on dynamic
> allocation for those, therefore removing the need to involve the percpu module
> reserved pool at all.
> 
> > 
> > I don't see a way around this short of changing module loading to do
> > alloc_percpu() and then updating the relocation based on this result.
> > Which would admittedly be far more convenient.  I was assuming that
> > this would be difficult due to varying CPU offsets or the like.
> > 
> > But if it can be done reasonably, it would be quite a bit nicer than
> > forcing dynamic allocation in cases where it is not otherwise needed.
> 
> Hopefully my explanation above helps clear out what I have in mind.
> 
> You can find similar tricks performed by include/linux/tracepoint.h:
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PREL32_RELOCATIONS
> static inline struct tracepoint *tracepoint_ptr_deref(tracepoint_ptr_t *p)
> {
>         return offset_to_ptr(p);
> }
> 
> #define __TRACEPOINT_ENTRY(name)                                        \
>         asm("   .section \"__tracepoints_ptrs\", \"a\"          \n"     \
>             "   .balign 4                                       \n"     \
>             "   .long   __tracepoint_" #name " - .              \n"     \
>             "   .previous                                       \n")
> #else
> static inline struct tracepoint *tracepoint_ptr_deref(tracepoint_ptr_t *p)
> {
>         return *p;
> }
> 
> #define __TRACEPOINT_ENTRY(name)                                         \
>         static tracepoint_ptr_t __tracepoint_ptr_##name __used           \
>         __attribute__((section("__tracepoints_ptrs"))) =                 \
>                 &__tracepoint_##name
> #endif
> 
> [...]
> 
> #define DEFINE_TRACE_FN(name, reg, unreg)                                \
>         static const char __tpstrtab_##name[]                            \
>         __attribute__((section("__tracepoints_strings"))) = #name;       \
>         struct tracepoint __tracepoint_##name                            \
>         __attribute__((section("__tracepoints"), used)) =                \
>                 { __tpstrtab_##name, STATIC_KEY_INIT_FALSE, reg, unreg, NULL };\
>         __TRACEPOINT_ENTRY(name);
> 
> And kernel/module.c:
> 
> find_module_sections():
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS
>         mod->tracepoints_ptrs = section_objs(info, "__tracepoints_ptrs",
>                                              sizeof(*mod->tracepoints_ptrs),
>                                              &mod->num_tracepoints);
> #endif
> 
> And kernel/tracepoint.c:tracepoint_module_notify() for the module coming/going
> notifier.
> 
> Basically you would want to have your own structure within your own section of
> the module which describes the srcu domain, and have a module coming/going
> notifier responsible for dynamically allocating the srcu domain on "coming", and
> doing a srcu barrier and cleanup the domain on "going".

Ah, sounds like an excellent approach!  I will give it a shot, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> 
> > 
> >							Thanx, Paul
> > 
> >> Thanks,
> >> 
> >> Mathieu
> >> 
> >> 
> >> > 
> >> >							Thanx, Paul
> >> > 
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> 
> >> >> Mathieu
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > This series consist of the following:
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > 1.	Dynamically allocate dax_srcu.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > 2.	Dynamically allocate drm_unplug_srcu.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > 3.	Dynamically allocate kfd_processes_srcu.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > These build and have been subjected to 0day testing, but might also need
> >> >> > testing by someone having the requisite hardware.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> >							Thanx, Paul
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > drivers/dax/super.c                        |   10 +++++-
> >> >> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.c |    5 +++
> >> >> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_process.c   |    2 -
> >> >> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c                  |    8 ++++
> >> >> > include/linux/srcutree.h                   |   19 +++++++++--
> >> >> > kernel/rcu/rcuperf.c                       |   40 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> >> >> > kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c                    |   48 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >> >> >  7 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> >> >> 
> >> >> --
> >> >> Mathieu Desnoyers
> >> >> EfficiOS Inc.
> >> >> http://www.efficios.com
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Mathieu Desnoyers
> >> EfficiOS Inc.
> >> http://www.efficios.com
> 
> -- 
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com
>