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: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 08:57:29 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100407155729.GA2481@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24225.1270646561@redhat.com>

On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 02:22:41PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > +#define rcu_access_pointer(p, c) \
> 
> Why is there a need for 'c'?

An example use is where rcu_access_pointer() is legal because we are
either initializing or cleaning up, so that no other CPU has access
to the pointer.  In these cases, you might do something like:

	q = rcu_access_pointer(p->a, p->refcnt == 0);

> > +#define rcu_dereference_protect(p, c) \
> 
> I'd prefer rcu_dereference_protected(), I think.  This macro doesn't protect
> anything.  Also, again, why the need for 'c'?

Agreed on rcu_dereference_protected().  I succumbed to a fit of "make
the identifier shorter", please accept my apologies.

> For instance, in:
> 
> 	static struct nfs_delegation *nfs_detach_delegation_locked(struct nfs_inode *nfsi, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
> 	{
> 		struct nfs_delegation *delegation =
> 			rcu_dereference_protected(nfsi->delegation, ????);
> 
> what would be the condition?  That the spinlock is held?  That's a condition
> for calling the function.

Yep, that the spinlock is held.  I agree that it is a bit obvious in
this case, but I have come across a number of RCU uses where the lock
in question was acquired many function calls removed from the access,
and where there other locks were held for other purposes.

> And in:
> 
> 	void nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim(struct inode *inode)
> 	{
> 		struct nfs_client *clp = NFS_SERVER(inode)->nfs_client;
> 		struct nfs_inode *nfsi = NFS_I(inode);
> 		struct nfs_delegation *delegation;
> 
> 		if (rcu_access_pointer(nfsi->delegation, ????) != NULL) {
> 
> what would be the condition here?  There's no lock to check - that's the whole
> point of the macro.  I also can't give it nfsi->delegation to check as the
> value may change between the two accesses.

I suggest something like the following:

		/* protected by double-check lock pattern. */
		if (rcu_access_pointer(nfsi->delegation, 1) != NULL) {

							Thanx, Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-07 15:57 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
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 [this message]
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=20100407155729.GA2481@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).