From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, niv@us.ibm.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/urgent 1/4] rcu: add rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 22:47:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1270792042-9358-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100409054701.GA8833@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This patch adds variants of rcu_dereference() that handle situations
where the RCU-protected data structure cannot change, perhaps due to
our holding the update-side lock, or where the RCU-protected pointer is
only to be fetched, not dereferenced. These are needed due to some
performance concerns with using rcu_dereference() where it is not
required, aside from the need for lockdep/sparse checking.
The new rcu_access_pointer() primitive is for the case where the pointer
is be fetch and not dereferenced. This primitive may be used without
protection, RCU or otherwise, due to the fact that it uses ACCESS_ONCE().
The new rcu_dereference_protected() primitive is for the case where updates
are prevented, for example, due to holding the update-side lock. This
primitive does neither ACCESS_ONCE() nor smp_read_barrier_depends(), so
can only be used when updates are somehow prevented.
Suggested-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 872a98e..b00b20e 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -209,9 +209,42 @@ static inline int rcu_read_lock_sched_held(void)
rcu_dereference_raw(p); \
})
+/**
+ * rcu_access_pointer - fetch RCU pointer with no dereferencing
+ *
+ * Return the value of the specified RCU-protected pointer, but omit the
+ * smp_read_barrier_depends() and keep the ACCESS_ONCE(). This is useful
+ * when the value of this pointer is accessed, but the pointer is not
+ * dereferenced, for example, when testing an RCU-protected pointer against
+ * NULL. This may also be used in cases where update-side locks prevent
+ * the value of the pointer from changing, but rcu_dereference_protected()
+ * is a lighter-weight primitive for this use case.
+ */
+#define rcu_access_pointer(p) ((void *)ACCESS_ONCE(p))
+
+/**
+ * rcu_dereference_protected - fetch RCU pointer when updates prevented
+ *
+ * Return the value of the specified RCU-protected pointer, but omit
+ * both the smp_read_barrier_depends() and the ACCESS_ONCE(). This
+ * is useful in cases where update-side locks prevent the value of the
+ * pointer from changing. Please note that this primitive does -not-
+ * prevent the compiler from repeating this reference or combining it
+ * with other references, so it should not be used without protection
+ * of appropriate locks.
+ */
+#define rcu_dereference_protected(p, c) \
+ ({ \
+ if (debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() && !(c)) \
+ lockdep_rcu_dereference(__FILE__, __LINE__); \
+ (p); \
+ })
+
#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
#define rcu_dereference_check(p, c) rcu_dereference_raw(p)
+#define rcu_access_pointer(p) ((void *)ACCESS_ONCE(p))
+#define rcu_dereference_protected(p, c) (p)
#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
--
1.7.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-09 5:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-09 5:47 [PATCH tip/core/urgent] rcu: updates for RCU lockdep Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 5:47 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-04-09 5:47 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 2/4] RCU: Better explain the condition parameter of rcu_dereference_check() Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 5:47 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 3/4] rcu: Update docs for rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 5:47 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 4/4] rcu: fix syntax error in rcu_dereference_check() example in comment Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 8:59 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent] rcu: updates for RCU lockdep Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-09 9:10 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 1/4] rcu: add rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected David Howells
2010-04-09 9:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-04-09 16:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-12 19:24 ` Josh Triplett
2010-04-12 20:30 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-04-12 20:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 16:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 9:11 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 2/4] RCU: Better explain the condition parameter of rcu_dereference_check() David Howells
2010-04-09 9:16 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 3/4] rcu: Update docs for rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected David Howells
2010-04-09 9:17 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 4/4] rcu: fix syntax error in rcu_dereference_check() example in comment David Howells
2010-04-09 16:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 22:38 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent] v2 rcu: updates for RCU lockdep Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 22:39 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 1/3] rcu: add rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-10 6:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-04-14 15:00 ` [tip:core/urgent] rcu: Add " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 22:39 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 2/3] RCU: Better explain the condition parameter of rcu_dereference_check() Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 15:01 ` [tip:core/urgent] rcu: " tip-bot for David Howells
2010-04-09 22:39 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 3/3] rcu: Update docs for rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 15:01 ` [tip:core/urgent] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-10 8:13 ` [PATCH tip/core/urgent 1/3] rcu: add " David Howells
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=1270792042-9358-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®