From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Suzanne Wood <suzannew@cs.pdx.edu>
Subject: Re: [LIST] Add missing rcu_dereference on first element
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:03:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051015020324.GL1302@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051015002649.GA28555@gondor.apana.org.au>
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 10:26:49AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Hi:
>
> It seems that all the list_*_rcu primitives are missing a memory barrier
> on the very first dereference. For example,
>
> #define list_for_each_rcu(pos, head) \
> for (pos = (head)->next; prefetch(pos->next), pos != (head); \
> pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next))
>
> It will go something like:
>
> pos = (head)->next
>
> prefetch(pos->next)
>
> pos != (head)
>
> do stuff
>
> We're missing a barrier here.
>
> pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next)
>
> fetch pos->next
>
> barrier given by rcu_dereference(pos->next)
>
> store pos
>
> Without the missing barrier, the pos->next value may turn out to be
> stale. In fact, if "do stuff" were also dereferencing pos and relying
> on list_for_each_rcu to provide the barrier then it may also break.
>
> So here is a patch to make sure that we have a barrier for the first
> element in the list.
Good catch!!! I wonder if Alpha SMP Linux machines have noticed...
Some comments interspersed.
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
> Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
> PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
> diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
> --- a/include/linux/list.h
> +++ b/include/linux/list.h
> @@ -442,12 +442,15 @@ static inline void list_splice_init(stru
> * as long as the traversal is guarded by rcu_read_lock().
> */
> #define list_for_each_rcu(pos, head) \
> - for (pos = (head)->next; prefetch(pos->next), pos != (head); \
> - pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next))
> + for (pos = (head)->next; \
> + pos = rcu_dereference(pos), \
> + prefetch(pos->next), pos != (head); \
> + pos = pos->next)
Why not something like the following? Seems a bit simpler to me.
#define list_for_each_rcu(pos, head) \
for (pos = rcu_dereference((head)->next); \
prefetch(pos->next), pos != (head); \
pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next))
> #define __list_for_each_rcu(pos, head) \
> - for (pos = (head)->next; pos != (head); \
> - pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next))
> + for (pos = (head)->next; \
> + rcu_dereference(pos) != (head); \
> + pos = pos->next)
>
> /**
> * list_for_each_safe_rcu - iterate over an rcu-protected list safe
> @@ -461,8 +464,9 @@ static inline void list_splice_init(stru
> * as long as the traversal is guarded by rcu_read_lock().
> */
> #define list_for_each_safe_rcu(pos, n, head) \
> - for (pos = (head)->next, n = pos->next; pos != (head); \
> - pos = rcu_dereference(n), n = pos->next)
> + for (pos = (head)->next; \
> + n = rcu_dereference(pos)->next, pos != (head); \
> + pos = n)
>
> /**
> * list_for_each_entry_rcu - iterate over rcu list of given type
> @@ -474,11 +478,11 @@ static inline void list_splice_init(stru
> * the _rcu list-mutation primitives such as list_add_rcu()
> * as long as the traversal is guarded by rcu_read_lock().
> */
> -#define list_for_each_entry_rcu(pos, head, member) \
> - for (pos = list_entry((head)->next, typeof(*pos), member); \
> - prefetch(pos->member.next), &pos->member != (head); \
> - pos = rcu_dereference(list_entry(pos->member.next, \
> - typeof(*pos), member)))
> +#define list_for_each_entry_rcu(pos, head, member) \
> + for (pos = list_entry((head)->next, typeof(*pos), member); \
> + pos = rcu_dereference(pos), \
> + prefetch(pos->member.next), &pos->member != (head); \
> + pos = list_entry(pos->member.next, typeof(*pos), member))
>
>
> /**
> @@ -492,8 +496,10 @@ static inline void list_splice_init(stru
> * as long as the traversal is guarded by rcu_read_lock().
> */
> #define list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos, head) \
> - for ((pos) = (pos)->next; prefetch((pos)->next), (pos) != (head); \
> - (pos) = rcu_dereference((pos)->next))
> + for ((pos) = (pos)->next; \
> + (pos) = rcu_dereference((pos)), \
> + prefetch((pos)->next), (pos) != (head); \
> + (pos) = (pos)->next)
The above hurts my head -- childhood trauma due to having to use a
FORTRAN compiler that required "I=I" at odd intervals in order to
generate correct code... How about the following?
#define list_for_each_continue_rcu(pos, head) \
for ((pos) = (pos)->next; \
prefetch(rcu_dereference(pos)->next), (pos) != (head); \
(pos) = (pos)->next)
> /*
> * Double linked lists with a single pointer list head.
> @@ -696,8 +702,9 @@ static inline void hlist_add_after_rcu(s
> pos = n)
>
> #define hlist_for_each_rcu(pos, head) \
> - for ((pos) = (head)->first; pos && ({ prefetch((pos)->next); 1; }); \
> - (pos) = rcu_dereference((pos)->next))
> + for ((pos) = (head)->first; \
> + rcu_dereference((pos)) && ({ prefetch((pos)->next); 1; }); \
> + (pos) = (pos)->next)
>
> /**
> * hlist_for_each_entry - iterate over list of given type
> @@ -762,9 +769,9 @@ static inline void hlist_add_after_rcu(s
> */
> #define hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(tpos, pos, head, member) \
> for (pos = (head)->first; \
> - pos && ({ prefetch(pos->next); 1;}) && \
> + rcu_dereference(pos) && ({ prefetch(pos->next); 1;}) && \
> ({ tpos = hlist_entry(pos, typeof(*tpos), member); 1;}); \
> - pos = rcu_dereference(pos->next))
> + pos = pos->next)
>
> #else
> #warning "don't include kernel headers in userspace"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-15 2:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-15 0:26 Herbert Xu
2005-10-15 2:03 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2005-10-15 2:39 ` Herbert Xu
2005-10-15 3:22 ` Herbert Xu
2005-10-16 20:58 ` 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=20051015020324.GL1302@us.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suzannew@cs.pdx.edu \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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®