Message-Id: <20190109211850.31599-10-paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed,  9 Jan 2019 13:18:48 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.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,
        fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/12] rcu: Consolidate PREEMPT and !PREEMPT synchronize_rcu()

Now that rcu_blocking_is_gp() makes the correct immediate-return
decision for both PREEMPT and !PREEMPT, a single implementation of
synchronize_rcu() will work correctly under both configurations.
This commit therefore eliminates a few lines of code by consolidating
the two implementations of synchronize_rcu().

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree.c        | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h    | 27 ---------------
 kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 64 -----------------------------------
 3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index fc37bec32731..e2bd42b2b563 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -2950,6 +2950,79 @@ void kfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kfree_call_rcu);
 
+/*
+ * During early boot, any blocking grace-period wait automatically
+ * implies a grace period.  Later on, this is never the case for PREEMPT.
+ *
+ * Howevr, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPT, any
+ * blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if
+ * there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of
+ * either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited().  It is OK to
+ * occasionally incorrectly indicate that there are multiple CPUs online
+ * when there was in fact only one the whole time, as this just adds some
+ * overhead: RCU still operates correctly.
+ */
+static int rcu_blocking_is_gp(void)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT))
+		return rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE;
+	might_sleep();  /* Check for RCU read-side critical section. */
+	preempt_disable();
+	ret = num_online_cpus() <= 1;
+	preempt_enable();
+	return ret;
+}
+
+/**
+ * synchronize_rcu - wait until a grace period has elapsed.
+ *
+ * Control will return to the caller some time after a full grace
+ * period has elapsed, in other words after all currently executing RCU
+ * read-side critical sections have completed.  Note, however, that
+ * upon return from synchronize_rcu(), the caller might well be executing
+ * concurrently with new RCU read-side critical sections that began while
+ * synchronize_rcu() was waiting.  RCU read-side critical sections are
+ * delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(), and may be nested.
+ * In addition, regions of code across which interrupts, preemption, or
+ * softirqs have been disabled also serve as RCU read-side critical
+ * sections.  This includes hardware interrupt handlers, softirq handlers,
+ * and NMI handlers.
+ *
+ * Note that this guarantee implies further memory-ordering guarantees.
+ * On systems with more than one CPU, when synchronize_rcu() returns,
+ * each CPU is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier since
+ * the end of its last RCU read-side critical section whose beginning
+ * preceded the call to synchronize_rcu().  In addition, each CPU having
+ * an RCU read-side critical section that extends beyond the return from
+ * synchronize_rcu() is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier
+ * after the beginning of synchronize_rcu() and before the beginning of
+ * that RCU read-side critical section.  Note that these guarantees include
+ * CPUs that are offline, idle, or executing in user mode, as well as CPUs
+ * that are executing in the kernel.
+ *
+ * Furthermore, if CPU A invoked synchronize_rcu(), which returned
+ * to its caller on CPU B, then both CPU A and CPU B are guaranteed
+ * to have executed a full memory barrier during the execution of
+ * synchronize_rcu() -- even if CPU A and CPU B are the same CPU (but
+ * again only if the system has more than one CPU).
+ */
+void synchronize_rcu(void)
+{
+	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) ||
+			 lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) ||
+			 lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map),
+			 "Illegal synchronize_rcu() in RCU read-side critical section");
+	if (rcu_blocking_is_gp())
+		return;
+	if (rcu_gp_is_expedited())
+		synchronize_rcu_expedited();
+	else
+		wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu);
+
 /**
  * get_state_synchronize_rcu - Snapshot current RCU state
  *
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index b800bdfe74b3..353d113c0cd4 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -643,33 +643,6 @@ static void _synchronize_rcu_expedited(void)
 	mutex_unlock(&rcu_state.exp_mutex);
 }
 
-/*
- * During early boot, any blocking grace-period wait automatically
- * implies a grace period.  Later on, this is never the case for PREEMPT.
- *
- * Howevr, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPT, any
- * blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if
- * there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of
- * either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited().  It is OK to
- * occasionally incorrectly indicate that there are multiple CPUs online
- * when there was in fact only one the whole time, as this just adds some
- * overhead: RCU still operates correctly.
- */
-static int rcu_blocking_is_gp(void)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE)
-		return true;
-	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT))
-		return false;
-	might_sleep();  /* Check for RCU read-side critical section. */
-	preempt_disable();
-	ret = num_online_cpus() <= 1;
-	preempt_enable();
-	return ret;
-}
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
 
 /*
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index bcf3e7366a28..43f3f2ee9d63 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -825,54 +825,6 @@ static void rcu_flavor_check_callbacks(int user)
 		t->rcu_read_unlock_special.b.need_qs = true;
 }
 
-/**
- * synchronize_rcu - wait until a grace period has elapsed.
- *
- * Control will return to the caller some time after a full grace
- * period has elapsed, in other words after all currently executing RCU
- * read-side critical sections have completed.  Note, however, that
- * upon return from synchronize_rcu(), the caller might well be executing
- * concurrently with new RCU read-side critical sections that began while
- * synchronize_rcu() was waiting.  RCU read-side critical sections are
- * delimited by rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(), and may be nested.
- * In addition, regions of code across which interrupts, preemption, or
- * softirqs have been disabled also serve as RCU read-side critical
- * sections.  This includes hardware interrupt handlers, softirq handlers,
- * and NMI handlers.
- *
- * Note that this guarantee implies further memory-ordering guarantees.
- * On systems with more than one CPU, when synchronize_rcu() returns,
- * each CPU is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier since
- * the end of its last RCU read-side critical section whose beginning
- * preceded the call to synchronize_rcu().  In addition, each CPU having
- * an RCU read-side critical section that extends beyond the return from
- * synchronize_rcu() is guaranteed to have executed a full memory barrier
- * after the beginning of synchronize_rcu() and before the beginning of
- * that RCU read-side critical section.  Note that these guarantees include
- * CPUs that are offline, idle, or executing in user mode, as well as CPUs
- * that are executing in the kernel.
- *
- * Furthermore, if CPU A invoked synchronize_rcu(), which returned
- * to its caller on CPU B, then both CPU A and CPU B are guaranteed
- * to have executed a full memory barrier during the execution of
- * synchronize_rcu() -- even if CPU A and CPU B are the same CPU (but
- * again only if the system has more than one CPU).
- */
-void synchronize_rcu(void)
-{
-	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) ||
-			 lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) ||
-			 lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map),
-			 "Illegal synchronize_rcu() in RCU read-side critical section");
-	if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_INACTIVE)
-		return;
-	if (rcu_gp_is_expedited())
-		synchronize_rcu_expedited();
-	else
-		wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu);
-
 /*
  * Check for a task exiting while in a preemptible-RCU read-side
  * critical section, clean up if so.  No need to issue warnings,
@@ -1115,22 +1067,6 @@ static void rcu_flavor_check_callbacks(int user)
 	}
 }
 
-/* PREEMPT=n implementation of synchronize_rcu(). */
-void synchronize_rcu(void)
-{
-	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) ||
-			 lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) ||
-			 lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map),
-			 "Illegal synchronize_rcu() in RCU read-side critical section");
-	if (rcu_blocking_is_gp())
-		return;
-	if (rcu_gp_is_expedited())
-		synchronize_rcu_expedited();
-	else
-		wait_rcu_gp(call_rcu);
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(synchronize_rcu);
-
 /*
  * Because preemptible RCU does not exist, tasks cannot possibly exit
  * while in preemptible RCU read-side critical sections.
-- 
2.17.1

Powered by blists - more mailing lists