mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH] rcu: exp: Fix "must hold exp_mutex" comments for QS reporting functions
Date: Wed,  7 Mar 2018 16:49:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180307084944.10229-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com> (raw)

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 are merely used for synchronize
between GPs, and it's clearly 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 fix this problem by correcting the comments

Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Fixes: d9a3da0699b2 ("rcu: Add expedited grace-period support for preemptible RCU")
---
 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 f8e4571efabf..2fd882b08b7c 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)
-- 
2.16.2

             reply	other threads:[~2018-03-07  8:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-07  8:49 Boqun Feng [this message]
2018-03-07 15:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-08  3:46   ` Boqun Feng
2018-03-08  4:30     ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-08  4:54       ` Boqun Feng
2018-03-08  8:30         ` Boqun Feng
2018-03-08 15:42           ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-09  6:57             ` Boqun Feng
2018-03-09 20:17               ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-03-12  5:28                 ` Boqun Feng
2018-03-13  0:15                   ` 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=20180307084944.10229-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --to=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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®