linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] lib/percpu-refcount: introduce percpu_ref

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]

Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:55:07 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] lib/percpu-refcount: introduce percpu_ref_resurge()

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 01:19:10PM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
> Hi Ming
> 
> On 09/18/2018 06:19 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > +		unsigned long __percpu *percpu_count;
> > +
> > +		WARN_ON_ONCE(__ref_is_percpu(ref, &percpu_count));
> > +
> > +		/* get one extra ref for avoiding race with .release */
> > +		rcu_read_lock_sched();
> > +		atomic_long_add(1, &ref->count);
> > +		rcu_read_unlock_sched();
> > +	}
> 
> The rcu_read_lock_sched here is redundant. We have been in the critical section
> of a spin_lock_irqsave.

Right.

> 
> The atomic_long_add(1, &ref->count) may have two result.
> 1. ref->count > 1
>    it will not drop to zero any more.
> 2. ref->count == 1
>    it has dropped to zero and .release may be running.

IMO, both the two cases are fine and supported, or do you have other
concern about this way?

thanks, 
Ming