| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1449702902-2520-4-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 15:14:58 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 4/8] documentation: Composability analogies This commit expands on RCU's composability by comparing it to that of transactional memory and of locking. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> --- Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html | 8 ++++++++ Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html index cc5b587c0ec5..105247149975 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html @@ -1495,6 +1495,14 @@ section, neither of which is conducive to a long-lived and prosperous kernel. <p> +It is worth noting that RCU is not alone in limiting composability. +For example, many transactional-memory implementations prohibit +composing a pair of transactions separated by an irrevocable +operation (for example, a network receive operation). +For another example, lock-based critical sections can be composed +surprisingly freely, but only if deadlock is avoided. + +<p> In short, although RCU read-side critical sections are highly composable, care is required in some situations, just as is the case for any other composable synchronization mechanism. diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx index 23524d75a3c3..5b76e21fa092 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx @@ -1654,6 +1654,14 @@ section, neither of which is conducive to a long-lived and prosperous kernel. <p> +It is worth noting that RCU is not alone in limiting composability. +For example, many transactional-memory implementations prohibit +composing a pair of transactions separated by an irrevocable +operation (for example, a network receive operation). +For another example, lock-based critical sections can be composed +surprisingly freely, but only if deadlock is avoided. + +<p> In short, although RCU read-side critical sections are highly composable, care is required in some situations, just as is the case for any other composable synchronization mechanism. -- 2.5.2 -- 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