From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com,
bobby.prani@gmail.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 7/8] documentation: Update RCU requirements based on expedited changes
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 15:15:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1449702902-2520-7-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151209231426.GA2241@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Because RCU-sched expedited grace periods now use IPIs and interact
with rcu_read_unlock(), it is no longer sufficient to disable preemption
across RCU read-side critical sections that acquire and hold scheduler
locks. It is now necessary to instead disable interrupts. This commit
documents this change.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html | 12 ++++++++++--
Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx | 10 +++++++++-
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html
index 96cdcf7195d5..a725f9900ec8 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
<!-- DO NOT HAND EDIT. -->
-<!-- Instead, edit Requirements.htmlx and run 'sh htmlqqz.sh Requirements' -->
+<!-- Instead, edit Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx and run 'sh htmlqqz.sh Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements' -->
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
@@ -1957,7 +1957,7 @@ the runqueue locks and the priority-inheritance locks
in the middle of an outermost RCU read-side critical section unless either
(1) it releases them before exiting that same
RCU read-side critical section, or
-(2) preemption is disabled across
+(2) interrupts are disabled across
that entire RCU read-side critical section.
This same prohibition also applies (recursively!) to any lock that is acquired
while holding any lock to which this prohibition applies.
@@ -1966,6 +1966,14 @@ Adhering to this rule prevents preemptible RCU from invoking
priority-inheritance locks are held, thus avoiding deadlock.
<p>
+Prior to v4.4, it was only necessary to disable preemption across
+RCU read-side critical sections that acquired scheduler locks.
+In v4.4, expedited grace periods started using IPIs, and these
+IPIs could force a <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt> to take the slowpath.
+Therefore, this expedited-grace-period change required disabling of
+interrupts, not just preemption.
+
+<p>
For RCU's part, the preemptible-RCU <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt>
implementation must be written carefully to avoid similar deadlocks.
In particular, <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt> must tolerate an
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx
index 2d0cd90987f6..3a97ba490c42 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx
@@ -2124,7 +2124,7 @@ the runqueue locks and the priority-inheritance locks
in the middle of an outermost RCU read-side critical section unless either
(1) it releases them before exiting that same
RCU read-side critical section, or
-(2) preemption is disabled across
+(2) interrupts are disabled across
that entire RCU read-side critical section.
This same prohibition also applies (recursively!) to any lock that is acquired
while holding any lock to which this prohibition applies.
@@ -2133,6 +2133,14 @@ Adhering to this rule prevents preemptible RCU from invoking
priority-inheritance locks are held, thus avoiding deadlock.
<p>
+Prior to v4.4, it was only necessary to disable preemption across
+RCU read-side critical sections that acquired scheduler locks.
+In v4.4, expedited grace periods started using IPIs, and these
+IPIs could force a <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt> to take the slowpath.
+Therefore, this expedited-grace-period change required disabling of
+interrupts, not just preemption.
+
+<p>
For RCU's part, the preemptible-RCU <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt>
implementation must be written carefully to avoid similar deadlocks.
In particular, <tt>rcu_read_unlock()</tt> must tolerate an
--
2.5.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-09 23:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-09 23:14 [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 0/8] Documentation updates for 4.5 Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 1/8] documentation: Record RCU requirements Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 2/8] Documentation: Record bottom-bit-zero guarantee for ->next Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 3/8] documentation: Cover requirements controlling stall warnings Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 4/8] documentation: Composability analogies Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 5/8] documentation: Expand on scheduler/RCU deadlock requirements Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:15 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 6/8] documentation: Clarify RCU memory barriers and requirements Paul E. McKenney
2015-12-09 23:15 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-12-09 23:15 ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 8/8] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Fix ACCESS_ONCE thinko Paul E. McKenney
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=1449702902-2520-7-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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
Powered by JetHome