public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC rcu] Fix get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() GP-start detection
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:56:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z5OqE-eJDo-1W_-r@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEXW_YSo1NTmx8FE3WNN7zL9so24o40HXhxubHJVvfxWBYtz0w@mail.gmail.com>

Le Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 08:49:47PM -0500, Joel Fernandes a écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 7:59 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > The get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() and poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full()
> > functions use the root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field to detect
> > the beginnings and ends of grace periods, respectively.  This choice is
> > necessary for the poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function because
> > (give or take counter wrap), the following sequence is guaranteed not
> > to trigger:
> >
> >         get_state_synchronize_rcu_full(&rgos);
> >         synchronize_rcu();
> >         WARN_ON_ONCE(!poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full(&rgos));
> >
> > The RCU callbacks that awaken synchronize_rcu() instances are
> > guaranteed not to be invoked before the root rcu_node structure's
> > ->gp_seq field is updated to indicate the end of the grace period.
> > However, these callbacks might start being invoked immediately
> > thereafter, in particular, before rcu_state.gp_seq has been updated.
> > Therefore, poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() must refer to the
> > root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field.  Because this field is
> > updated under this structure's ->lock, any code following a call to
> > poll_state_synchronize_rcu_full() will be fully ordered after the
> > full grace-period computation, as is required by RCU's memory-ordering
> > semantics.
> >
> > By symmetry, the get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() function should also
> > use this same root rcu_node structure's ->gp_seq field.  But it turns out
> > that symmetry is profoundly (though extremely infrequently) destructive
> > in this case.  To see this, consider the following sequence of events:
> >
> > 1.      CPU 0 starts a new grace period, and updates rcu_state.gp_seq
> >         accordingly.

I don't think so because idle CPUs are waited upon to report a QS, unlike
offline CPUs that don't appear in ->qsmaskinitnext.

If the CPU 1 is idle while the grace period kthread scans its
ct_rcu_watching_cpu(), then the QS is reported on its behalf and when CPU 1
goes out of idle it is guaranteed to see the new started GP on the root node.

If the CPU 1 is not idle while the grace period kthread scans its
ct_rcu_watching_cpu(), then CPU 1 must report a QS and that cancels the race.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-01-24 14:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-13  0:59 [PATCH RFC rcu] Fix get_state_synchronize_rcu_full() GP-start detection Paul E. McKenney
2024-12-13 19:49 ` [PATCH RFC v2 " Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-24 14:49   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-24 15:58     ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-24 16:42       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-24 19:40         ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-24 22:25           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-24 22:50             ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-24 23:03   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-25  0:01     ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-25 14:56       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-01-25 18:39         ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-27  1:13           ` Joel Fernandes
2025-01-27  1:22             ` Joel Fernandes
2025-01-27  2:03               ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-27  2:55                 ` Joel Fernandes
2025-01-27  2:58                   ` Joel Fernandes
2025-01-27 16:49                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-27 18:45                       ` Joel Fernandes
2025-02-11  0:28                         ` Joel Fernandes
2025-02-11  1:22                           ` Joel Fernandes
2025-02-12 10:14                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-12 10:42                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-01-24  1:49 ` [PATCH RFC " Joel Fernandes
2025-01-24 14:56   ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2025-01-24 20:21     ` Joel Fernandes

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=Z5OqE-eJDo-1W_-r@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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