From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
sbw@mit.edu, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/16] rcu: Improve SRCU's grace-period comments
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:23:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1384561418-30575-9-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1384561418-30575-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This commit documents the memory-barrier guarantees provided by
synchronize_srcu() and call_srcu().
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/rcu/srcu.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcu.c b/kernel/rcu/srcu.c
index 0f0c63111f20..3318d8284384 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/srcu.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/srcu.c
@@ -363,6 +363,29 @@ static void srcu_flip(struct srcu_struct *sp)
/*
* Enqueue an SRCU callback on the specified srcu_struct structure,
* initiating grace-period processing if it is not already running.
+ *
+ * Note that all CPUs must agree that the grace period extended beyond
+ * all pre-existing SRCU read-side critical section. On systems with
+ * more than one CPU, this means that when "func()" is invoked, each CPU
+ * is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier since the end of
+ * its last corresponding SRCU read-side critical section whose beginning
+ * preceded the call to call_rcu(). It also means that each CPU executing
+ * an SRCU read-side critical section that continues beyond the start of
+ * "func()" must have executed a memory barrier after the call_rcu()
+ * but before the beginning of that SRCU read-side critical section.
+ * Note that these guarantees include CPUs that are offline, idle, or
+ * executing in user mode, as well as CPUs that are executing in the kernel.
+ *
+ * Furthermore, if CPU A invoked call_rcu() and CPU B invoked the
+ * resulting SRCU callback function "func()", then both CPU A and CPU
+ * B are guaranteed to execute a full memory barrier during the time
+ * interval between the call to call_rcu() and the invocation of "func()".
+ * This guarantee applies even if CPU A and CPU B are the same CPU (but
+ * again only if the system has more than one CPU).
+ *
+ * Of course, these guarantees apply only for invocations of call_srcu(),
+ * srcu_read_lock(), and srcu_read_unlock() that are all passed the same
+ * srcu_struct structure.
*/
void call_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, struct rcu_head *head,
void (*func)(struct rcu_head *head))
@@ -459,7 +482,30 @@ static void __synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp, int trycount)
* Note that it is illegal to call synchronize_srcu() from the corresponding
* SRCU read-side critical section; doing so will result in deadlock.
* However, it is perfectly legal to call synchronize_srcu() on one
- * srcu_struct from some other srcu_struct's read-side critical section.
+ * srcu_struct from some other srcu_struct's read-side critical section,
+ * as long as the resulting graph of srcu_structs is acyclic.
+ *
+ * There are memory-ordering constraints implied by synchronize_srcu().
+ * On systems with more than one CPU, when synchronize_srcu() returns,
+ * each CPU is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier since
+ * the end of its last corresponding SRCU-sched read-side critical section
+ * whose beginning preceded the call to synchronize_srcu(). In addition,
+ * each CPU having an SRCU read-side critical section that extends beyond
+ * the return from synchronize_srcu() is guaranteed to have executed a
+ * full memory barrier after the beginning of synchronize_srcu() and before
+ * the beginning of that SRCU read-side critical section. Note that these
+ * guarantees include CPUs that are offline, idle, or executing in user mode,
+ * as well as CPUs that are executing in the kernel.
+ *
+ * Furthermore, if CPU A invoked synchronize_srcu(), which returned
+ * to its caller on CPU B, then both CPU A and CPU B are guaranteed
+ * to have executed a full memory barrier during the execution of
+ * synchronize_srcu(). This guarantee applies even if CPU A and CPU B
+ * are the same CPU, but again only if the system has more than one CPU.
+ *
+ * Of course, these memory-ordering guarantees apply only when
+ * synchronize_srcu(), srcu_read_lock(), and srcu_read_unlock() are
+ * passed the same srcu_struct structure.
*/
void synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *sp)
{
@@ -476,12 +522,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_srcu);
* Wait for an SRCU grace period to elapse, but be more aggressive about
* spinning rather than blocking when waiting.
*
- * Note that it is also illegal to call synchronize_srcu_expedited()
- * from the corresponding SRCU read-side critical section;
- * doing so will result in deadlock. However, it is perfectly legal
- * to call synchronize_srcu_expedited() on one srcu_struct from some
- * other srcu_struct's read-side critical section, as long as
- * the resulting graph of srcu_structs is acyclic.
+ * Note that synchronize_srcu_expedited() has the same deadlock and
+ * memory-ordering properties as does synchronize_srcu().
*/
void synchronize_srcu_expedited(struct srcu_struct *sp)
{
--
1.8.1.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-16 0:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-16 0:23 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/16] Fixes for 3.14 Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/16] rcu: Kick CPU halfway to RCU CPU stall warning Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/16] rcu: Fix and comment ordering around wait_event() Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/16] rcu: Break call_rcu() deadlock involving scheduler and perf Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/16] rcu: Allow task-level idle entry/exit nesting Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/16] rcu: Fix srcu_barrier() docbook header Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/16] rcu: Let the world know when RCU adjusts its geometry Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/16] rcu: Fix coccinelle warnings Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/16] rcu: Fix CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT for odd fanout/leaf values Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/16] rcu: Provide better diagnostics for blocking in RCU callback functions Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/16] rcu: Warn on allegedly impossible rcu_read_unlock_special() from irq Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/16] srcu: Add API for barrier after srcu_read_unlock() Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/16] rcu: Don't activate RCU core on NO_HZ_FULL CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/16] rcu/torture: Dynamically allocate SRCU output buffer to avoid overflow Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/16] rcu: Remove "extern" from function declarations in include/linux/*rcu*.h Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-16 0:23 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 16/16] rcu: Remove "extern" from function declarations in kernel/rcu/rcu.h 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=1384561418-30575-9-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).