public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:49:51 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051210151951.GA2798@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4399D852.47E0BB4E@tv-sign.ru>

On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 10:17:38PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:31:06PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > I can't see how this change can prevent idle cpus to be included in
> > > ->cpumask, cpu can add itself to nohz_cpu_mask right after some other
> > > cpu started new grace period.
> > 
> > Yes that can happen, but if they check for rcu_pending right after that
> > it will prevent them from going tickless atleast (which will prevent grace
> > periods from being unnecessarily extended). Something like below:
> > 
> >         CPU0                                    CPU1
> > 
> >         rcp->cur++;     /* New GP */
> > 
> >         smp_mb();
> 
> I think I need some education on memory barriers.
> 
> Does this mb() garantees that the new value of ->cur will be visible
> on other cpus immediately after smp_mb() (so that rcu_pending() will
> notice it) ?

AFAIK the new value of ->cur should be visible to other CPUs when smp_mb() 
returns. Here's a definition of smp_mb() from Paul's article:

smp_mb(): "memory barrier" that orders both loads and stores. This means loads 
and stores preceding the memory barrier are committed to memory before any 
loads and stores following the memory barrier.

[ http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8211 ]

> My understanding is that it only garantees that all stores before it
> must be visible before any store after mb. (yes, mb implies rmb, but
> I think it does not matter if CPU1 adds itself to nonhz mask after
> CPU0 reads nohz_cpu_mask). This means that CPU1 can read the stale
> value of ->cur. I guess I am wrong, but I can't prove it to myself.
> 
> Could you please clarify this?
> 
> Even simpler question:
> 
> CPU0
> 	var = 1;
> 	wmb();
> 
> after that CPU1 does rmb().
> 
> Does it garantees that CPU1 will see the new value of var?

Again, going by the above article, I would expect CPU1 to see the new value of 
var.


-- 


Thanks and Regards,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri,
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Labs,
Bangalore, INDIA - 560017

  reply	other threads:[~2005-12-10 15:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-12-08 19:31 [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-09  2:46 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-09 19:17   ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-10 15:19     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri [this message]
2005-12-10 18:55       ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-11 17:41         ` Semantics of smp_mb() [was : Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask ] Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-11 21:21           ` Andrew James Wade
2005-12-11 23:45             ` Rusty Russell
2005-12-12  0:49               ` Keith Owens
2005-12-12  8:41                 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-12 19:33                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-12-13  5:20                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13  5:07               ` Andrew James Wade
2005-12-13  5:43                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13 11:20                 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-13 16:20                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-13 22:27                     ` Keith Owens
2005-12-13 22:50                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-14  1:12                         ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-14  1:46                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-15 21:15                       ` Semantics of smp_mb() Roland Dreier
2005-12-16  7:46                       ` Semantics of smp_mb() [was : Re: [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask ] Jeremy Higdon
2006-03-13 18:39                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2006-03-31  4:56                           ` Jeremy Higdon
2006-03-31  6:18                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2006-03-31 23:38                             ` Jesse Barnes
2005-12-12  3:10         ` [PATCH] Fix RCU race in access of nohz_cpu_mask Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-12  4:32           ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-12  4:38             ` David S. Miller
2005-12-12  4:47               ` Nick Piggin
2005-12-12  4:49             ` Paul Mackerras
2005-12-12  6:27             ` Keith Owens
2005-12-09  2:56 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-12-05 11:02 Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2005-12-08  0:37 ` Andrew Morton

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=20051210151951.GA2798@in.ibm.com \
    --to=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
    /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