From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, RCU <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] rcu/kvfree: Move need_offload_krc() out of krcp->lock
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 15:38:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221129233833.GA154809@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221129155822.538434-4-urezki@gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 04:58:21PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> Currently a need_offload_krc() function requires the krcp->lock
> to be held because krcp->head can not be checked concurrently.
>
> Fix it by updating the krcp->head using WRITE_ONCE() macro so
> it becomes lock-free and safe for readers to see a valid data
> without any locking.
Don't we also need to use READ_ONCE() for the code loading this krcp->head
pointer? Or do the remaining plain C-language accesses somehow avoid
running concurrently with those new WRITE_ONCE() invocations?
Thanx, Paul
> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 11 ++++-------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 445f8c11a9a3..c94c17194299 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -3058,7 +3058,7 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
> // objects queued on the linked list.
> if (!krwp->head_free) {
> krwp->head_free = krcp->head;
> - krcp->head = NULL;
> + WRITE_ONCE(krcp->head, NULL);
> }
>
> WRITE_ONCE(krcp->count, 0);
> @@ -3072,6 +3072,8 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
> }
> }
>
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> +
> // If there is nothing to detach, it means that our job is
> // successfully done here. In case of having at least one
> // of the channels that is still busy we should rearm the
> @@ -3079,8 +3081,6 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
> // still in progress.
> if (need_offload_krc(krcp))
> schedule_delayed_monitor_work(krcp);
> -
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> }
>
> static enum hrtimer_restart
> @@ -3250,7 +3250,7 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void *ptr)
>
> head->func = ptr;
> head->next = krcp->head;
> - krcp->head = head;
> + WRITE_ONCE(krcp->head, head);
> success = true;
> }
>
> @@ -3327,15 +3327,12 @@ static struct shrinker kfree_rcu_shrinker = {
> void __init kfree_rcu_scheduler_running(void)
> {
> int cpu;
> - unsigned long flags;
>
> for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp = per_cpu_ptr(&krc, cpu);
>
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&krcp->lock, flags);
> if (need_offload_krc(krcp))
> schedule_delayed_monitor_work(krcp);
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-29 23:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-29 15:58 [PATCH v2 0/4] kvfree_rcu() updates related to polled API Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2022-11-29 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] rcu/kvfree: Switch to a generic linked list API Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2022-11-29 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] rcu/kvfree: Move bulk/list reclaim to separate functions Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2022-11-29 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] rcu/kvfree: Move need_offload_krc() out of krcp->lock Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2022-11-29 23:38 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2022-11-30 12:56 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-11-30 18:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-12-02 13:19 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-11-29 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] rcu/kvfree: Use a polled API to speedup a reclaim process Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2022-12-01 23:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-12-02 12:54 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2022-12-02 19:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-11-29 16:37 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] kvfree_rcu() updates related to polled API 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=20221129233833.GA154809@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com \
--cc=oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
/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®