* [PATCH 03/48] rcu: Add lockdep checks and kernel-doc header to rcu_softirq_qs()
[not found] <20240507093530.3043-1-urezki@gmail.com>
@ 2024-05-07 9:34 ` Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) @ 2024-05-07 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul E . McKenney
Cc: RCU, Neeraj upadhyay, Boqun Feng, Hillf Danton, Joel Fernandes,
LKML, Uladzislau Rezki, Oleksiy Avramchenko, Frederic Weisbecker,
Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, David S. Miller, Yan Zhai, netdev
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
There is some indications that rcu_softirq_qs() might be more generally
used than anticipated. This commit therefore adds some lockdep assertions
and some cautionary tales in a new kernel-doc header.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zd4DXTyCf17lcTfq@debian.debian/
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Yan Zhai <yan@cloudflare.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index d9642dd06c25..2795a1457acf 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -240,8 +240,36 @@ static long rcu_get_n_cbs_cpu(int cpu)
return 0;
}
+/**
+ * rcu_softirq_qs - Provide a set of RCU quiescent states in softirq processing
+ *
+ * Mark a quiescent state for RCU, Tasks RCU, and Tasks Trace RCU.
+ * This is a special-purpose function to be used in the softirq
+ * infrastructure and perhaps the occasional long-running softirq
+ * handler.
+ *
+ * Note that from RCU's viewpoint, a call to rcu_softirq_qs() is
+ * equivalent to momentarily completely enabling preemption. For
+ * example, given this code::
+ *
+ * local_bh_disable();
+ * do_something();
+ * rcu_softirq_qs(); // A
+ * do_something_else();
+ * local_bh_enable(); // B
+ *
+ * A call to synchronize_rcu() that began concurrently with the
+ * call to do_something() would be guaranteed to wait only until
+ * execution reached statement A. Without that rcu_softirq_qs(),
+ * that same synchronize_rcu() would instead be guaranteed to wait
+ * until execution reached statement B.
+ */
void rcu_softirq_qs(void)
{
+ RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) ||
+ lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) ||
+ lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map),
+ "Illegal rcu_softirq_qs() in RCU read-side critical section");
rcu_qs();
rcu_preempt_deferred_qs(current);
rcu_tasks_qs(current, false);
--
2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] only message in thread