From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: jiangshanlai@gmail.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [QUESTION] srcu: Remove the SCAN2 state
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:05:18 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fb00133e-776b-50c7-1a46-b56c3339622b@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180222021147.GA2855@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 2/22/2018 11:11 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 08:57:27AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm sorry for bothering you, and I seem to be obviously missing
>> something, but I'm really wondering why we check try_check_zero()
>> again in the state, SCAN1, for the previous srcu_idx.
>>
>> I mean, since we've already checked try_check_zero() in the previous
>> grace period and gotten 'true' as a return value, all readers who see
>> the flipped idx via srcu_flip() won't update the src_{lock,unlock}_count
>> for the previous idx until it gets flipped back again.
>>
>> Is there any reasons we check try_check_zero() again in the state, SCAN1?
>> Is there any problems if the following patch's applied?
>
> Indeed there are! Removing the second scan exposes us to a nasty race
> condition where a reader is preempted (or interrupted or whatever) just
Indeed! I missed the cases. It should be as it is.
Thanks a lot for pointing it out.
> after fetching its counter. A detailed explanation for an essentially
--
Thanks,
Byungchul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-22 5:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-21 23:57 Byungchul Park
2018-02-22 2:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-22 5:05 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2018-02-22 16:54 ` 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=fb00133e-776b-50c7-1a46-b56c3339622b@lge.com \
--to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--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®