From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/6] documentation: Document call_rcu() safety mechanisms and limitations
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:26:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1392672413-5114-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140217212625.GA4083@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
The call_rcu() family of primitives will take action to accelerate
grace periods when the number of callbacks pending on a given CPU
becomes excessive. Although this safety mechanism can be useful,
it is no substitute for users of call_rcu() having rate-limit controls
in place. This commit adds this nuance to the documentation.
Reported-by: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Reported-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
index 91266193b8f4..5733e31836b5 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
@@ -256,10 +256,11 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
variations on this theme.
b. Limiting update rate. For example, if updates occur only
- once per hour, then no explicit rate limiting is required,
- unless your system is already badly broken. The dcache
- subsystem takes this approach -- updates are guarded
- by a global lock, limiting their rate.
+ once per hour, then no explicit rate limiting is
+ required, unless your system is already badly broken.
+ Older versions of the dcache subsystem takes this
+ approach -- updates were guarded by a global lock,
+ limiting their rate.
c. Trusted update -- if updates can only be done manually by
superuser or some other trusted user, then it might not
@@ -268,7 +269,8 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
the machine.
d. Use call_rcu_bh() rather than call_rcu(), in order to take
- advantage of call_rcu_bh()'s faster grace periods.
+ advantage of call_rcu_bh()'s faster grace periods. (This
+ is only a partial solution, though.)
e. Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited
number of updates per grace period.
@@ -276,6 +278,13 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
The same cautions apply to call_rcu_bh(), call_rcu_sched(),
call_srcu(), and kfree_rcu().
+ Note that although these primitives do take action to avoid memory
+ exhaustion when any given CPU has too many callbacks, a determined
+ user could still exhaust memory. This is especially the case
+ if a system with a large number of CPUs has been configured to
+ offload all of its RCU callbacks onto a single CPU, or if the
+ system has relatively little free memory.
+
9. All RCU list-traversal primitives, which include
rcu_dereference(), list_for_each_entry_rcu(), and
list_for_each_safe_rcu(), must be either within an RCU read-side
--
1.8.1.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-17 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-17 21:26 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/6] Documentation changes for 3.15 Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: ACCESS_ONCE() provides cache coherence Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:40 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Conditional must use prior load Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/6] Documentation/kernel-per-CPU-kthreads.txt: Workqueue affinity Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Need barriers() for some control dependencies Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:46 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 0:02 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 0:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 0:45 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 3:29 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 4:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/6] documentation: Fix some inconsistencies in RTFP.txt Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:39 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/6] documentation: Document call_rcu() safety mechanisms and limitations Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:47 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/6] Documentation changes for 3.15 Josh Triplett
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=1392672413-5114-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--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®