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,
fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, joel.opensrc@gmail.com,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] rcu: exp: Fix "must hold exp_mutex" comments for QS reporting functions
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 19:21:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1524450079-20938-2-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180423022047.GA20189@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Since commit d9a3da0699b2 ("rcu: Add expedited grace-period support
for preemptible RCU"), there are comments for some funtions in
rcu_report_exp_rnp()'s call-chain saying that exp_mutex or its
predecessors needs to be held.
However, exp_mutex and its predecessors were used only to synchronize
between GPs, and it is clear that all variables visited by those functions
are under the protection of rcu_node's ->lock. Moreover, those functions
are currently called without held exp_mutex, and seems that doesn't
introduce any trouble.
So this patch fixes this problem by updating the comments to match the
current code.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Fixes: d9a3da0699b2 ("rcu: Add expedited grace-period support for preemptible RCU")
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 10 +++-------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index 73e1d3dca5b1..d7622cb85aa7 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused sync_exp_reset_tree(struct rcu_state *rsp)
* for the current expedited grace period. Works only for preemptible
* RCU -- other RCU implementation use other means.
*
- * Caller must hold the rcu_state's exp_mutex.
+ * Caller must hold the specificed rcu_node structure's ->lock
*/
static bool sync_rcu_preempt_exp_done(struct rcu_node *rnp)
{
@@ -170,8 +170,7 @@ static bool sync_rcu_preempt_exp_done(struct rcu_node *rnp)
* recursively up the tree. (Calm down, calm down, we do the recursion
* iteratively!)
*
- * Caller must hold the rcu_state's exp_mutex and the specified rcu_node
- * structure's ->lock.
+ * Caller must hold the specified rcu_node structure's ->lock.
*/
static void __rcu_report_exp_rnp(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
bool wake, unsigned long flags)
@@ -207,8 +206,6 @@ static void __rcu_report_exp_rnp(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
/*
* Report expedited quiescent state for specified node. This is a
* lock-acquisition wrapper function for __rcu_report_exp_rnp().
- *
- * Caller must hold the rcu_state's exp_mutex.
*/
static void __maybe_unused rcu_report_exp_rnp(struct rcu_state *rsp,
struct rcu_node *rnp, bool wake)
@@ -221,8 +218,7 @@ static void __maybe_unused rcu_report_exp_rnp(struct rcu_state *rsp,
/*
* Report expedited quiescent state for multiple CPUs, all covered by the
- * specified leaf rcu_node structure. Caller must hold the rcu_state's
- * exp_mutex.
+ * specified leaf rcu_node structure.
*/
static void rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult(struct rcu_state *rsp, struct rcu_node *rnp,
unsigned long mask, bool wake)
--
2.5.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-23 2:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-23 2:20 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/3] Parallelize expedited grace periods for v4.18 Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-23 2:21 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] rcu: Parallelize expedited grace-period initialization Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-23 2:21 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-04-23 2:21 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/3] rcu: exp: Protect all sync_rcu_preempt_exp_done() with rcu_node lock 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=1524450079-20938-2-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel.opensrc@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®