From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>,
Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: while_each_thread() under rcu_read_lock() is broken?
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 17:41:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100709004107.GQ2426@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100708235925.A71DA4A967@magilla.sf.frob.com>
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 04:59:25PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > We can't do call_rcu(release_task),
> > we can't take tasklist for writing in the softirq context. But even
> > if we could, this can't help in fact or I missed something.
>
> Ah, I had missed that constraint of call_rcu. (It's not mentioned in the
> kerneldoc comment directly, and is only buried in a couple of brief
> mentions in Documentation/RCU/.) I was thinking that would suffice because
> it does it between rcu_read_lock critical sections, but I guess it actually
> only does it after the last one and doesn't prevent a new one from having
> started on another CPU. (And we can't use it anyway.)
Hmmm... The kerneldoc for rcu_read_lock() looks like it says this
pretty unambiguously. Then again, that is easy for me to say, given
that I was the one who made most of this stuff up. ;-)
But it has been awhile since I looked after the kerneldoc. Please see
below for the changes I would make if left to myself.
Any other suggestions for improvement to the kerneldoc?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit b12483332f1a7ee2db11f4bdc3c4e61edb608b01
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu Jul 8 17:38:59 2010 -0700
rcu: improve kerneldoc for rcu_read_lock(), call_rcu(), and synchronize_rcu()
Make it explicit that new RCU read-side critical sections that start
after call_rcu() and synchronize_rcu() start might still be running
after the end of the relevant grace period.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 508ebba..27b44b3 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void);
* until after the all the other CPUs exit their critical sections.
*
* Note, however, that RCU callbacks are permitted to run concurrently
- * with RCU read-side critical sections. One way that this can happen
+ * with new RCU read-side critical sections. One way that this can happen
* is via the following sequence of events: (1) CPU 0 enters an RCU
* read-side critical section, (2) CPU 1 invokes call_rcu() to register
* an RCU callback, (3) CPU 0 exits the RCU read-side critical section,
@@ -602,11 +602,13 @@ extern void wakeme_after_rcu(struct rcu_head *head);
/**
* call_rcu() - Queue an RCU callback for invocation after a grace period.
* @head: structure to be used for queueing the RCU updates.
- * @func: actual update function to be invoked after the grace period
+ * @func: actual callback function to be invoked after the grace period
*
- * The update function will be invoked some time after a full grace
- * period elapses, in other words after all currently executing RCU
- * read-side critical sections have completed. RCU read-side critical
+ * The callback function will be invoked some time after a full grace
+ * period elapses, in other words after all pre-existing RCU read-side
+ * critical sections have completed. However, the callback function
+ * might well execute concurrently with RCU read-side critical sections
+ * that started after call_rcu() was invoked. RCU read-side critical
* sections are delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(),
* and may be nested.
*/
@@ -616,9 +618,9 @@ extern void call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head,
/**
* call_rcu_bh() - Queue an RCU for invocation after a quicker grace period.
* @head: structure to be used for queueing the RCU updates.
- * @func: actual update function to be invoked after the grace period
+ * @func: actual callback function to be invoked after the grace period
*
- * The update function will be invoked some time after a full grace
+ * The callback function will be invoked some time after a full grace
* period elapses, in other words after all currently executing RCU
* read-side critical sections have completed. call_rcu_bh() assumes
* that the read-side critical sections end on completion of a softirq
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
index 9906f85..63bb771 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcutree_plugin.h
@@ -546,9 +546,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(call_rcu);
*
* Control will return to the caller some time after a full grace
* period has elapsed, in other words after all currently executing RCU
- * read-side critical sections have completed. RCU read-side critical
- * sections are delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(),
- * and may be nested.
+ * read-side critical sections have completed. Note, however, that
+ * upon return from synchronize_rcu(), the caller might well be executing
+ * concurrently with new RCU read-side critical sections that began while
+ * synchronize_rcu() was waiting. RCU read-side critical sections are
+ * delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(), and may be nested.
*/
void synchronize_rcu(void)
{
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-09 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-18 19:02 [PATCH] fix the racy check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks()->rcu_lock_break() logic Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-18 19:34 ` while_each_thread() under rcu_read_lock() is broken? Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-18 21:08 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-18 22:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-18 22:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-21 17:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-21 17:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-21 18:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-21 19:02 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-21 20:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-21 21:19 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-22 14:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-07-08 23:59 ` Roland McGrath
2010-07-09 0:41 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-07-09 1:01 ` Roland McGrath
2010-07-09 16:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-21 20:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-21 21:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-21 21:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-22 21:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-22 22:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-23 15:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-24 18:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-24 18:50 ` Chris Friesen
2010-06-24 22:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-25 0:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-25 3:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-25 10:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-07-09 0:52 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-24 21:14 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-25 3:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-07-09 0:41 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-24 21:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-25 3:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-25 9:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-28 23:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-29 13:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-29 15:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-29 17:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-19 5:00 ` Mandeep Baines
2010-06-19 5:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-19 15:44 ` Mandeep Baines
2010-06-19 19:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-18 20:11 ` [PATCH] fix the racy check_hung_uninterruptible_tasks()->rcu_lock_break() logic Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-18 20:38 ` Mandeep Singh Baines
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=20100709004107.GQ2426@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=msb@google.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.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
Powered by JetHome