mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	mingo@kernel.org, john.stultz@linaro.org, dimitrysh@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Rework writer block/wake to not use wait-queues
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:37:02 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161205173702.GA23348@linux-80c1.suse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161205112636.GA30280@redhat.com>

On Mon, 05 Dec 2016, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

>Yes. But percpu_down_write() should not be used after exit_notify(), so we
>can rely on rcu_read_lock(), release_task()->call_rcu(delayed_put_task_struct)
>can't be called until an exiting task passes exit_notify().
>
>But then we probably need WARN_ON(current->exit_state) in percpu_down_write().

Hmm, my immediate thought would have been doing a PF_EXITING check, but of course
this enlarges the window of the warn being triggered, yet maintains what you are
saying in that percpu_down_write should not be used after do_exit/exit_notify.
Furthermore, reading the comment in task_rcu_dereference, I get your point and
we can loose the reference to the task, iow busted rcu read cr.

>
>And personally I think this change should add the new helpers, they can have
>more users. Something like
>
>	struct xxx {

What do you think of s/xxx/rcuwait?

Thanks,
Davidlohr

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-12-05 17:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-18 18:54 [PATCH -tip 0/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: writer-side optimizations Davidlohr Bueso
2016-11-18 18:54 ` [PATCH 1/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Move text file into Documentation/locking/ Davidlohr Bueso
2016-11-18 18:54 ` [PATCH 2/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Replace bulky wait-queues with swait Davidlohr Bueso
2016-11-21 12:55   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-11-21 17:26     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-12-03  2:18   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Rework writer block/wake to not use wait-queues Davidlohr Bueso
2016-12-05  8:36     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-05 11:26       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-12-05 11:32         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-12-05 17:37         ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2016-12-05 17:19       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-12-05 17:13     ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-11-18 18:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] locking/percpu-rwsem: Avoid unnecessary writer wakeups Davidlohr Bueso
2016-11-21 12:23   ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-11-21 12:29     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-21 12:47       ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-11-21 15:07         ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-11-22  3:59           ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-11-23 14:43             ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20161205173702.GA23348@linux-80c1.suse \
    --to=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dbueso@suse.de \
    --cc=dimitrysh@google.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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