linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() [ver #2]
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:08:32 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100331000832.GQ2513@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21972.1269993064@redhat.com>

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:51:04AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > Which it is, as long as the lock is held.
> 
> However, in one of the situations I'm thinking of, no lock is held.  All that
> is being tested is whether the pointer to some RCU-protected data is either
> NULL or non-NULL.  For example:
> 
> 	@@ -345,7 +346,7 @@ int nfs_inode_return_delegation(struct inode *inode)
> 		struct nfs_delegation *delegation;
> 		int err = 0;
> 
> 	-	if (rcu_dereference(nfsi->delegation) != NULL) {
> 	+	if (nfsi->delegation != NULL) {
> 			spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
> 			delegation = nfs_detach_delegation_locked(nfsi, NULL);
> 			spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
> 
> No lock - RCU or spinlock - is held over the check of nfsi->delegation - which
> causes lockdep to complain about an unguarded rcu_dereference().
> 
> However, the use of rcu_dereference() here is unnecessary with respect to the
> interpolation (where appropriate) of a memory barrier because there is no
> second memory access against which to order.
> 
> That said, the memory access is repeated inside nfs_detach_delegation_locked(),
> which again was wrapped in an rcu_dereference():
> 
> 	 static struct nfs_delegation *nfs_detach_delegation_locked(struct nfs_inode *nfsi, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
> 	 {
> 	-	struct nfs_delegation *delegation = rcu_dereference(nfsi->delegation);
> 	+	struct nfs_delegation *delegation = nfsi->delegation;
> 
> 		if (delegation == NULL)
> 			goto nomatch;
> 
> which was not necessary for its memory barrier interpolation properties in this
> case because of the spin_lock() the caller now holds.
> 
> 
> Your suggestion of using rcu_dereference_check() in both these places would
> result in two unnecessary memory barriers on something like an Alpha CPU.
> 
> 
> How about:
> 
> 	static struct nfs_delegation *nfs_detach_delegation_locked(struct nfs_inode *nfsi, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
> 	{
> 		struct nfs_delegation *delegation =
> 			rcu_locked_dereference(nfsi->delegation);
> 		...
> 	}
> 
> where rcu_locked_dereference() only does the lockdep magic and the dereference,
> and does not include a memory barrier.  The documentation of such a function
> would note this may only be used when the pointer is guarded by an exclusive
> lock to prevent it from changing.
> 
> And then:
> 
> 	int nfs_inode_return_delegation(struct inode *inode)
> 	{
> 		struct nfs_client *clp = NFS_SERVER(inode)->nfs_client;
> 		struct nfs_inode *nfsi = NFS_I(inode);
> 		struct nfs_delegation *delegation;
> 		int err = 0;
> 
> 		if (rcu_pointer_not_null(nfsi->delegation)) {
> 			spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
> 			delegation = nfs_detach_delegation_locked(nfsi, NULL);
> 			spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
> 			if (delegation != NULL) {
> 				nfs_msync_inode(inode);
> 				err = __nfs_inode_return_delegation(inode, delegation, 1);
> 			}
> 		}
> 		return err;
> 	}
> 
> where rcu_pointer_not_null() simply tests the value of the pointer, casting
> away the sparse RCU annotation and not doing the lockdep check and not
> including a barrier.  It would not return the value of the pointer, thus
> preventing you from needing the barrier as a result.

How about Eric's suggestion of rcu_dereference_protected()?  That name
doesn't imply a lock, which as you say above, isn't always needed to
keep the structure from changing.

							Thanx, Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-31  0:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-18 13:33 [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() [ver #2] David Howells
2010-03-19  2:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 19:02 ` David Howells
2010-03-29 19:21   ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 20:15   ` David Howells
2010-03-29 20:26     ` Eric Dumazet
2010-03-29 21:05     ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 22:22     ` David Howells
2010-03-29 22:36       ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 22:59       ` David Howells
2010-03-29 23:26         ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-30 15:40           ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-30 16:39           ` David Howells
2010-03-30 16:49             ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-30 17:04               ` Eric Dumazet
2010-03-30 17:25                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-30 23:51             ` David Howells
2010-03-31  0:08               ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-03-31 14:04               ` David Howells
2010-03-31 15:16                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-31 17:37                 ` David Howells
2010-03-31 18:30                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-31 18:32                   ` Eric Dumazet
2010-03-31 22:53                   ` David Howells
2010-04-01  1:29                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-01 11:45                     ` David Howells
2010-04-01 14:39                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-01 14:46                       ` David Howells
2010-04-05 17:57                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-06  9:30                         ` David Howells
2010-04-06 16:14                         ` David Howells
2010-04-06 17:29                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-06 19:34                           ` David Howells
2010-04-07  0:02                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-07 13:22                             ` David Howells
2010-04-07 15:57                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-07 16:35                               ` RCU condition checks David Howells
2010-04-07 17:10                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-11 22:57                                   ` Trond Myklebust
2010-04-12 16:47                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-30 16:37         ` [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() [ver #2] David Howells
2010-03-30 17:01           ` 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=20100331000832.GQ2513@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).