From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, 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
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/urgent] rcu: add rcu_access_pointer and rcu_dereference_protected
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 12:45:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100407164542.GB21378@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100407162620.GA11543@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
* Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> 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>
Acked-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
We should probably pull this in liburcu eventually too (renaming
ACCESS_ONCE() into LOAD_SHARED()).
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> rcupdate.h | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index 872a98e..3f06b3d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -209,9 +209,47 @@ 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, c) \
> + ({ \
> + if (debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() && !(c)) \
> + lockdep_rcu_dereference(__FILE__, __LINE__); \
> + 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, c) ACCESS_ONCE(p)
> +#define rcu_dereference_protected(p, c) (p)
>
> #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-07 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-07 16:26 Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-07 16:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-04-07 16:45 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2010-04-07 17:00 ` David Howells
2010-04-07 17:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-07 17:20 ` David Howells
2010-04-07 23:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-08 16:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-08 19:04 ` David Howells
2010-04-08 19:53 ` 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=20100407164542.GB21378@Krystal \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--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=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.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®