mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: rcu@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH rcu 3/6] rcu-tasks: Remove preemption disablement around srcu_read_[un]lock() calls
Date: Wed,  4 Jan 2023 16:44:53 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230105004501.1771332-5-paulmck@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230105004454.GA1771168@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>

From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>

Ever since the following commit:

	5a41344a3d83 ("srcu: Simplify __srcu_read_unlock() via this_cpu_dec()")

SRCU doesn't rely anymore on preemption to be disabled in order to
modify the per-CPU counter. And even then it used to be done from the API
itself.

Therefore and after checking further, it appears to be safe to remove
the preemption disablement around __srcu_read_[un]lock() in
exit_tasks_rcu_start() and exit_tasks_rcu_finish()

Suggested-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/tasks.h | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
index 50d4c0ec7a89f..fbaed2637a7ff 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
@@ -1008,9 +1008,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(show_rcu_tasks_classic_gp_kthread);
  */
 void exit_tasks_rcu_start(void) __acquires(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
 {
-	preempt_disable();
 	current->rcu_tasks_idx = __srcu_read_lock(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu);
-	preempt_enable();
 }
 
 /*
@@ -1022,9 +1020,7 @@ void exit_tasks_rcu_finish(void) __releases(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *t = current;
 
-	preempt_disable();
 	__srcu_read_unlock(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu, t->rcu_tasks_idx);
-	preempt_enable();
 	exit_tasks_rcu_finish_trace(t);
 }
 
-- 
2.31.1.189.g2e36527f23


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-01-05  0:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-05  0:44 [PATCH rcu 0/7] Torture-test updates for v6.3 Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 1/6] rcu-tasks: Use accurate runstart time for RCU Tasks boot-time testing Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 1/7] torture: Seed torture_random_state on CPU Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 2/6] rcu-tasks: Improve comments explaining tasks_rcu_exit_srcu purpose Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 2/7] refscale: Provide for initialization failure Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 3/7] refscale: Add tests using SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 4/7] locktorture: Allow non-rtmutex lock types to be boosted Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 4/6] rcu-tasks: Fix synchronize_rcu_tasks() VS zap_pid_ns_processes() Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 5/7] locktorture: Make the rt_boost factor a tunable Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 5/6] rcu-tasks: Make rude RCU-Tasks work well with CPU hotplug Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:44 ` [PATCH rcu 6/6] rcu-tasks: Handle queue-shrink/callback-enqueue race condition Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:45 ` [PATCH rcu 6/7] rcutorture: Drop sparse lock-acquisition annotations Paul E. McKenney
2023-01-05  0:45 ` [PATCH rcu 7/7] torture: Fix hang during kthread shutdown phase 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=20230105004501.1771332-5-paulmck@kernel.org \
    --to=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --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®