linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/core/rcu 20/23] rcu: Remove callback acceleration from grace-period initialization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1346350718-30937-20-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:18:35 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
	josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	dhowells@...hat.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, sbw@....edu, patches@...aro.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 20/23] rcu: Remove callback acceleration from grace-period initialization

From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Before grace-period initialization was moved to a kthread, the CPU
invoking this code would have at least one callback that needed
a grace period, often a newly registered callback.  However, moving
grace-period initialization means that the CPU with the callback
that was requesting a grace period is not necessarily the CPU that
is initializing the grace period, so this acceleration is less
valuable.  Because it also adds to the complexity of reasoning about
correctness, this commit removes it.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/rcutree.c |   19 -------------------
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index 86903df..44609c3 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -1055,25 +1055,6 @@ static int rcu_gp_init(struct rcu_state *rsp)
 	rsp->gpnum++;
 	trace_rcu_grace_period(rsp->name, rsp->gpnum, "start");
 	record_gp_stall_check_time(rsp);
-
-	/*
-	 * Because this CPU just now started the new grace period, we
-	 * know that all of its callbacks will be covered by this upcoming
-	 * grace period, even the ones that were registered arbitrarily
-	 * recently.    Therefore, advance all RCU_NEXT_TAIL callbacks
-	 * to RCU_NEXT_READY_TAIL.  When the CPU later recognizes the
-	 * start of the new grace period, it will advance all callbacks
-	 * one position, which will cause all of its current outstanding
-	 * callbacks to be handled by the newly started grace period.
-	 *
-	 * Other CPUs cannot be sure exactly when the grace period started.
-	 * Therefore, their recently registered callbacks must pass through
-	 * an additional RCU_NEXT_READY stage, so that they will be handled
-	 * by the next RCU grace period.
-	 */
-	rdp = __this_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda);
-	rdp->nxttail[RCU_NEXT_READY_TAIL] = rdp->nxttail[RCU_NEXT_TAIL];
-
 	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp->lock, flags);
 
 	/* Exclude any concurrent CPU-hotplug operations. */
-- 
1.7.8

--
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/