netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
	linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu: use read_seqbegin() rather than read_seqbegin_or_lock()
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 14:18:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231116131849.GA27763@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231027095842.GA30868@redhat.com>

David, Al,

So do you agree that

	- the usage of read_seqbegin_or_lock/need_seqretry in
	  this code makes no sense because read_seqlock_excl()
	  is not possible

	- this patch doesn't change the current behaviour but
	  simplifies the code and makes it more clear

?

On 10/27, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> read_seqbegin_or_lock() makes no sense unless you make "seq" odd
> after the lockless access failed. See thread_group_cputime() as
> an example, note that it does nextseq = 1 for the 2nd round.
> 
> So this code can use read_seqbegin() without changing the current
> behaviour.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> ---
>  net/rxrpc/conn_service.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c b/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> index 89ac05a711a4..bfafe58681d9 100644
> --- a/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> +++ b/net/rxrpc/conn_service.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  	struct rxrpc_conn_proto k;
>  	struct rxrpc_skb_priv *sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
>  	struct rb_node *p;
> -	unsigned int seq = 0;
> +	unsigned int seq;
>  
>  	k.epoch	= sp->hdr.epoch;
>  	k.cid	= sp->hdr.cid & RXRPC_CIDMASK;
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  		 * under just the RCU read lock, so we have to check for
>  		 * changes.
>  		 */
> -		read_seqbegin_or_lock(&peer->service_conn_lock, &seq);
> +		seq = read_seqbegin(&peer->service_conn_lock);
>  
>  		p = rcu_dereference_raw(peer->service_conns.rb_node);
>  		while (p) {
> @@ -49,9 +49,8 @@ struct rxrpc_connection *rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu(struct rxrpc_peer *peer,
>  				break;
>  			conn = NULL;
>  		}
> -	} while (need_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq));
> +	} while (read_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq));
>  
> -	done_seqretry(&peer->service_conn_lock, seq);
>  	_leave(" = %d", conn ? conn->debug_id : -1);
>  	return conn;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.25.1.362.g51ebf55
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-11-16 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-27  9:58 [PATCH] rxrpc_find_service_conn_rcu: use read_seqbegin() rather than read_seqbegin_or_lock() Oleg Nesterov
2023-10-27 10:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 15:45 ` David Howells
2023-11-01 20:23   ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 20:40     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 21:22       ` David Howells
2023-11-01 22:38         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 20:52     ` Al Viro
2023-11-01 21:52       ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 22:48         ` Al Viro
2023-11-01 23:17           ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 21:20     ` David Howells
2023-11-01 22:15       ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-01 22:29         ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-16 13:18 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2023-11-16 13:41   ` David Howells
2023-11-16 14:19     ` Oleg Nesterov
2023-11-16 15:02       ` David Howells
2023-11-16 15:06         ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20231116131849.GA27763@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.dionne@auristor.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).