diff options
| author | Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> | 2021-06-10 18:50:29 +0300 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> | 2021-07-20 23:36:33 +0300 |
| commit | c28adacc14e70e3260063e97ebb8dd984e6f7a07 (patch) | |
| tree | 0b0142d4768e452a48e8458b03b5423caaa078a7 | |
| parent | 9984fd7e5e2f16cf867dba43ab9a4d123b91d3d3 (diff) | |
| download | linux-c28adacc14e70e3260063e97ebb8dd984e6f7a07.tar.xz | |
rcu/doc: Add a quick quiz to explain further why we need smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()
Add some missing critical pieces of explanation to understand the need
for full memory barriers throughout the whole grace period state machine,
thanks to Paul's explanations.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
[ paulmck: Adjust code block per Akira Yokosawa. ]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst | 29 |
1 files changed, 29 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst index 11cdab037bff..eeb351296df1 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst @@ -112,6 +112,35 @@ on PowerPC. The ``smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()`` invocations prevent this ``WARN_ON()`` from triggering. ++-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +| **Quick Quiz**: | ++-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +| But the chain of rcu_node-structure lock acquisitions guarantees | +| that new readers will see all of the updater's pre-grace-period | +| accesses and also guarantees that the updater's post-grace-period | +| accesses will see all of the old reader's accesses. So why do we | +| need all of those calls to smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()? | ++-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +| **Answer**: | ++-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +| Because we must provide ordering for RCU's polling grace-period | +| primitives, for example, get_state_synchronize_rcu() and | +| poll_state_synchronize_rcu(). Consider this code:: | +| | +| CPU 0 CPU 1 | +| ---- ---- | +| WRITE_ONCE(X, 1) WRITE_ONCE(Y, 1) | +| g = get_state_synchronize_rcu() smp_mb() | +| while (!poll_state_synchronize_rcu(g)) r1 = READ_ONCE(X) | +| continue; | +| r0 = READ_ONCE(Y) | +| | +| RCU guarantees that the outcome r0 == 0 && r1 == 0 will not | +| happen, even if CPU 1 is in an RCU extended quiescent state | +| (idle or offline) and thus won't interact directly with the RCU | +| core processing at all. | ++-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ + This approach must be extended to include idle CPUs, which need RCU's grace-period memory ordering guarantee to extend to any RCU read-side critical sections preceding and following the current |