[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1492015222-16373-8-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:40:21 -0700
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 tip/core/rcu 8/9] doc: Emphasize that "toy" RCU requires recursive rwlock
Reported-by: "yangzc@....com.cn" <yangzc@....com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
index 6b0337008f9c..8c131a1c62ea 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
@@ -562,7 +562,9 @@ This section presents a "toy" RCU implementation that is based on
familiar locking primitives. Its overhead makes it a non-starter for
real-life use, as does its lack of scalability. It is also unsuitable
for realtime use, since it allows scheduling latency to "bleed" from
-one read-side critical section to another.
+one read-side critical section to another. It also assumes recursive
+reader-writer locks: If you try this with non-recursive locks, and
+you allow nested rcu_read_lock() calls, you can deadlock.
However, it is probably the easiest implementation to relate to, so is
a good starting point.
--
2.5.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists