[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190407193202.GA30934@localhost>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 19:32:02 +0000
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: paulmck <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>, rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
dipankar <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
fweisbec <fweisbec@...il.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
amd-gfx <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/4] Forbid static SRCU use in modules
On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:26:16PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Apr 7, 2019, at 9:59 AM, paulmck paulmck@...ux.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> > [ . . . ]
> >
> >> > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> >> > > b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> >> > > index f8f6f04c4453..c2d919a1566e 100644
> >> > > --- a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> >> > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> >> > > @@ -338,6 +338,10 @@
> >> > > KEEP(*(__tracepoints_ptrs)) /* Tracepoints: pointer array */ \
> >> > > __stop___tracepoints_ptrs = .; \
> >> > > *(__tracepoints_strings)/* Tracepoints: strings */ \
> >> > > + . = ALIGN(8); \
> >> > > + __start___srcu_struct = .; \
> >> > > + *(___srcu_struct_ptrs) \
> >> > > + __end___srcu_struct = .; \
> >> > > } \
> >> >
> >> > This vmlinux linker modification is not needed. I tested without it and srcu
> >> > torture works fine with rcutorture built as a module. Putting further prints
> >> > in kernel/module.c verified that the kernel is able to find the srcu structs
> >> > just fine. You could squash the below patch into this one or apply it on top
> >> > of the dev branch.
> >>
> >> Good point, given that otherwise FORTRAN named common blocks would not
> >> work.
> >>
> >> But isn't one advantage of leaving that stuff in the RO_DATA_SECTION()
> >> macro that it can be mapped read-only? Or am I suffering from excessive
> >> optimism?
> >
> > And to answer the other question, in the case where I am suffering from
> > excessive optimism, it should be a separate commit. Please see below
> > for the updated original commit thus far.
> >
> > And may I have your Tested-by?
>
> Just to confirm: does the cleanup performed in the modules going
> notifier end up acting as a barrier first before freeing the memory ?
> If not, is it explicitly stated that a barrier must be issued before
> module unload ?
>
You mean rcu_barrier? It is mentioned in the documentation that this is the
responsibility of the module writer to prevent delays for all modules.
thanks.
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists