From: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
urs.thuermann@volkswagen.de, oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de,
wg@grandegger.com, vladislav.yasevich@hp.com, sri@us.ibm.com,
linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] can: af_can.c use rcu_barrier() on module unload.
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:00:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A2D439A.4020803@hartkopp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090608161329.GD6961@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:11:38PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> This module uses rcu_call() thus it should use rcu_barrier()
>> on module unload.
>
> This does appear to make things better!!!
>
> However, I don't understand why it is safe to do the following in
> can_exit():
>
> hlist_for_each_entry_safe(d, n, next, &can_rx_dev_list, list) {
> hlist_del(&d->list);
> kfree(d);
> }
>
> Given that this list is scanned by RCU readers, shouldn't this kfree()
> be something like "call_rcu(&d->rcu, can_rx_delete_device);"?
>
> Also, what frees up the "struct receiver" structures?
Hi Paul,
af_can.c only provides an infrastructure for PF_CAN modules like can-raw.ko,
can-bcm.ko or can-isotp.ko.
Please take a look into can_notifier() in net/can/af_can.c and raw_notifier()
in net/can/raw.c:
The receivers are removed when the appropriate socket is closed that created
the belonging receivers. And you can not remove can.ko (af_can.c) when another
PF_CAN protocol like can-raw.ko is using it.
So when a netdev notifier removes the interface both the PF_CAN protocol (e.g.
can-raw.ko) and the PF_CAN core (af_can.c) cleans up all receivers and finally
removes the per-interface structure dev_rcv_lists (e.g. for can0).
In can_exit() all the dev_rcv_lists for ARPHRD_CAN interfaces are removed that
had been created by NETDEV_REGISTER notifier and are unused by any of the
PF_CAN protocols and therefore without any receivers attached to them.
The list is protected by spin_lock(&can_rcvlists_lock) - which is probably not
even needed in this particular case - and there is no PF_CAN protocol
registered at this time. So it's really save to remove the empty dev_rcv_lists
structs here that do not link to any receivers.
Puh - much text. But i hope it clarifies it.
Thinking about the rcu stuff again, rcu_barrier() still makes sense when you
are unloading the module chain of can-raw.ko and can.ko very fast.
Regards,
Oliver
>> Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@comx.dk>
>> ---
>>
>> net/can/af_can.c | 2 ++
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/can/af_can.c b/net/can/af_can.c
>> index 10f0528..e733725 100644
>> --- a/net/can/af_can.c
>> +++ b/net/can/af_can.c
>> @@ -903,6 +903,8 @@ static __exit void can_exit(void)
>> }
>> spin_unlock(&can_rcvlists_lock);
>>
>> + rcu_barrier(); /* Wait for completion of call_rcu()'s */
>> +
>> kmem_cache_destroy(rcv_cache);
>> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-08 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-08 13:11 [PATCH 0/5] We must use rcu_barrier() on module unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 13:11 ` [PATCH 1/5] 8021q: Vlan driver should use rcu_barrier() on unload instead of syncronize_net() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 15:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-08 13:11 ` [PATCH 2/5] nfnetlink_queue: Use rcu_barrier() on module unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 16:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-10 5:38 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-08 13:11 ` [PATCH 3/5] can: af_can.c use " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 13:24 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2009-06-10 8:10 ` David Miller
2009-06-10 10:02 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-10 11:33 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-08 16:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-08 17:00 ` Oliver Hartkopp [this message]
2009-06-08 13:11 ` [PATCH 4/5] sctp: protocol.c call rcu_barrier() on unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 16:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-09 15:44 ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-06-09 15:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <20090609155011.GD6789-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-09 16:26 ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-06-08 13:11 ` [PATCH 5/5] sunrpc/auth_gss: Call rcu_barrier() on module unload Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2009-06-08 16:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <20090608162656.GF6961-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-08 17:00 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-06-08 14:00 ` [PATCH 0/5] We must use " Patrick McHardy
2009-06-10 8:11 ` David Miller
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=4A2D439A.4020803@hartkopp.net \
--to=oliver@hartkopp.net \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hawk@comx.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.hartkopp@volkswagen.de \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.com \
--cc=urs.thuermann@volkswagen.de \
--cc=vladislav.yasevich@hp.com \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
/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).