[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080317212304.GA118@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 00:23:04 +0300
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, ego@...ibm.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, tytso@...ibm.com, dvhltc@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, josh@...edesktop.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, niv@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix misplaced mb() in rcu_enter/exit_nohz()
On 03/17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:17:41PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > (to clarify: my question is completely offtopic to this patch)
> > On 03/17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 09:30:47PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure the code below is up to date, but what I have in
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/time.c is:
> > > >
> > > > stop_hz_timer:
> > > >
> > > > cpu_set(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
> > > >
> > > > if (rcu_needs_cpu(cpu) || local_softirq_pending()) {
> > > > cpu_clear(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
> > > > return;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Don't we need smp_mb() after cpu_set() ?
> > >
> > > S390's memory model is quite strong, so it might not be needed.
> >
> > OK, in that case we shouldn't worry.
>
> I don't know if I would go -that- far. ;-)
>
> > > In any
> > > case, if needed, it goes -before- the cpu_set(), because the problems
> > > would arise if prior RCU read-side critical sections were to be reordered
> > > to follow this cpu_set(), right?
> >
> > No, but it is very possible I missed something.
> >
> > What if rcu_needs_cpu(cpu) is executed before cpu_set(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask)?
> > It can miss rcu_start_batch() -> rcp->cur++ and return false, but at the
> > same time rcu_start_batch() may see nohz_cpu_mask without this CPU.
>
> If you mean that the rcu_needs_cpu() executes before the cpu_set() in
> the code fragment above, while the rcu_start_batch() executes on some
> other CPU?
Yes, and __rcu_pending() sees the old value of ->cur.
IOW. Suppose that this CPU reads rcp->cur out of order. To simplify, let's
suppose that stop_hz_timer() on CPU_0 in fact does
xxx = rcu_needs_cpu(cpu); // false
// ---- WINDOW ------
cpu_set(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
if (xxx || local_softirq_pending()) {
... abort ...
}
...proceed...
Another CPU does rcu_start_batch() in the window above. In that case
rcp->cpumask will include CPU_0, and the grace period can't be completed
untill CPU_0 is "woken".
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists