~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

TOMOYO Linux Cross Reference
Linux/Documentation/RCU/UP.rst

Version: ~ [ linux-6.11.5 ] ~ [ linux-6.10.14 ] ~ [ linux-6.9.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.8.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.7.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.6.58 ] ~ [ linux-6.5.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.4.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.3.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.2.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.1.114 ] ~ [ linux-6.0.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.19.17 ] ~ [ linux-5.18.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.17.15 ] ~ [ linux-5.16.20 ] ~ [ linux-5.15.169 ] ~ [ linux-5.14.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.13.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.12.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.11.22 ] ~ [ linux-5.10.228 ] ~ [ linux-5.9.16 ] ~ [ linux-5.8.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.7.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.6.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.5.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.4.284 ] ~ [ linux-5.3.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.2.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.1.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.0.21 ] ~ [ linux-4.20.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.19.322 ] ~ [ linux-4.18.20 ] ~ [ linux-4.17.19 ] ~ [ linux-4.16.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.15.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.14.336 ] ~ [ linux-4.13.16 ] ~ [ linux-4.12.14 ] ~ [ linux-4.11.12 ] ~ [ linux-4.10.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.9.337 ] ~ [ linux-4.4.302 ] ~ [ linux-3.10.108 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.32.71 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.0 ] ~ [ linux-2.4.37.11 ] ~ [ unix-v6-master ] ~ [ ccs-tools-1.8.9 ] ~ [ policy-sample ] ~
Architecture: ~ [ i386 ] ~ [ alpha ] ~ [ m68k ] ~ [ mips ] ~ [ ppc ] ~ [ sparc ] ~ [ sparc64 ] ~

Diff markup

Differences between /Documentation/RCU/UP.rst (Version linux-6.11.5) and /Documentation/RCU/UP.rst (Version linux-5.18.19)


  1 .. _up_doc:                                         1 .. _up_doc:
  2                                                     2 
  3 RCU on Uniprocessor Systems                         3 RCU on Uniprocessor Systems
  4 ===========================                         4 ===========================
  5                                                     5 
  6 A common misconception is that, on UP systems,      6 A common misconception is that, on UP systems, the call_rcu() primitive
  7 may immediately invoke its function.  The basi      7 may immediately invoke its function.  The basis of this misconception
  8 is that since there is only one CPU, it should      8 is that since there is only one CPU, it should not be necessary to
  9 wait for anything else to get done, since ther      9 wait for anything else to get done, since there are no other CPUs for
 10 anything else to be happening on.  Although th     10 anything else to be happening on.  Although this approach will *sort of*
 11 work a surprising amount of the time, it is a      11 work a surprising amount of the time, it is a very bad idea in general.
 12 This document presents three examples that dem     12 This document presents three examples that demonstrate exactly how bad
 13 an idea this is.                                   13 an idea this is.
 14                                                    14 
 15 Example 1: softirq Suicide                         15 Example 1: softirq Suicide
 16 --------------------------                         16 --------------------------
 17                                                    17 
 18 Suppose that an RCU-based algorithm scans a li     18 Suppose that an RCU-based algorithm scans a linked list containing
 19 elements A, B, and C in process context, and c     19 elements A, B, and C in process context, and can delete elements from
 20 this same list in softirq context.  Suppose th     20 this same list in softirq context.  Suppose that the process-context scan
 21 is referencing element B when it is interrupte     21 is referencing element B when it is interrupted by softirq processing,
 22 which deletes element B, and then invokes call     22 which deletes element B, and then invokes call_rcu() to free element B
 23 after a grace period.                              23 after a grace period.
 24                                                    24 
 25 Now, if call_rcu() were to directly invoke its     25 Now, if call_rcu() were to directly invoke its arguments, then upon return
 26 from softirq, the list scan would find itself      26 from softirq, the list scan would find itself referencing a newly freed
 27 element B.  This situation can greatly decreas     27 element B.  This situation can greatly decrease the life expectancy of
 28 your kernel.                                       28 your kernel.
 29                                                    29 
 30 This same problem can occur if call_rcu() is i     30 This same problem can occur if call_rcu() is invoked from a hardware
 31 interrupt handler.                                 31 interrupt handler.
 32                                                    32 
 33 Example 2: Function-Call Fatality                  33 Example 2: Function-Call Fatality
 34 ---------------------------------                  34 ---------------------------------
 35                                                    35 
 36 Of course, one could avert the suicide describ     36 Of course, one could avert the suicide described in the preceding example
 37 by having call_rcu() directly invoke its argum     37 by having call_rcu() directly invoke its arguments only if it was called
 38 from process context.  However, this can fail      38 from process context.  However, this can fail in a similar manner.
 39                                                    39 
 40 Suppose that an RCU-based algorithm again scan     40 Suppose that an RCU-based algorithm again scans a linked list containing
 41 elements A, B, and C in process context, but t !!  41 elements A, B, and C in process contexts, but that it invokes a function
 42 on each element as it is scanned.  Suppose fur     42 on each element as it is scanned.  Suppose further that this function
 43 deletes element B from the list, then passes i     43 deletes element B from the list, then passes it to call_rcu() for deferred
 44 freeing.  This may be a bit unconventional, bu     44 freeing.  This may be a bit unconventional, but it is perfectly legal
 45 RCU usage, since call_rcu() must wait for a gr     45 RCU usage, since call_rcu() must wait for a grace period to elapse.
 46 Therefore, in this case, allowing call_rcu() t     46 Therefore, in this case, allowing call_rcu() to immediately invoke
 47 its arguments would cause it to fail to make t     47 its arguments would cause it to fail to make the fundamental guarantee
 48 underlying RCU, namely that call_rcu() defers      48 underlying RCU, namely that call_rcu() defers invoking its arguments until
 49 all RCU read-side critical sections currently      49 all RCU read-side critical sections currently executing have completed.
 50                                                    50 
 51 Quick Quiz #1:                                     51 Quick Quiz #1:
 52         Why is it *not* legal to invoke synchr     52         Why is it *not* legal to invoke synchronize_rcu() in this case?
 53                                                    53 
 54 :ref:`Answers to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz     54 :ref:`Answers to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_up>`
 55                                                    55 
 56 Example 3: Death by Deadlock                       56 Example 3: Death by Deadlock
 57 ----------------------------                       57 ----------------------------
 58                                                    58 
 59 Suppose that call_rcu() is invoked while holdi     59 Suppose that call_rcu() is invoked while holding a lock, and that the
 60 callback function must acquire this same lock.     60 callback function must acquire this same lock.  In this case, if
 61 call_rcu() were to directly invoke the callbac     61 call_rcu() were to directly invoke the callback, the result would
 62 be self-deadlock *even if* this invocation occ !!  62 be self-deadlock.
 63 call_rcu() invocation a full grace period late << 
 64                                                    63 
 65 In some cases, it would possible to restructur     64 In some cases, it would possible to restructure to code so that
 66 the call_rcu() is delayed until after the lock     65 the call_rcu() is delayed until after the lock is released.  However,
 67 there are cases where this can be quite ugly:      66 there are cases where this can be quite ugly:
 68                                                    67 
 69 1.      If a number of items need to be passed     68 1.      If a number of items need to be passed to call_rcu() within
 70         the same critical section, then the co     69         the same critical section, then the code would need to create
 71         a list of them, then traverse the list     70         a list of them, then traverse the list once the lock was
 72         released.                                  71         released.
 73                                                    72 
 74 2.      In some cases, the lock will be held a     73 2.      In some cases, the lock will be held across some kernel API,
 75         so that delaying the call_rcu() until      74         so that delaying the call_rcu() until the lock is released
 76         requires that the data item be passed      75         requires that the data item be passed up via a common API.
 77         It is far better to guarantee that cal     76         It is far better to guarantee that callbacks are invoked
 78         with no locks held than to have to mod     77         with no locks held than to have to modify such APIs to allow
 79         arbitrary data items to be passed back     78         arbitrary data items to be passed back up through them.
 80                                                    79 
 81 If call_rcu() directly invokes the callback, p     80 If call_rcu() directly invokes the callback, painful locking restrictions
 82 or API changes would be required.                  81 or API changes would be required.
 83                                                    82 
 84 Quick Quiz #2:                                     83 Quick Quiz #2:
 85         What locking restriction must RCU call     84         What locking restriction must RCU callbacks respect?
 86                                                    85 
 87 :ref:`Answers to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz     86 :ref:`Answers to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_up>`
 88                                                    87 
 89 It is important to note that userspace RCU imp << 
 90 permit call_rcu() to directly invoke callbacks << 
 91 grace period has elapsed since those callbacks << 
 92 the case because some userspace environments a << 
 93 Nevertheless, people writing userspace RCU imp << 
 94 encouraged to avoid invoking callbacks from ca << 
 95 the deadlock-avoidance benefits called out abo << 
 96                                                << 
 97 Summary                                            88 Summary
 98 -------                                            89 -------
 99                                                    90 
100 Permitting call_rcu() to immediately invoke it     91 Permitting call_rcu() to immediately invoke its arguments breaks RCU,
101 even on a UP system.  So do not do it!  Even o     92 even on a UP system.  So do not do it!  Even on a UP system, the RCU
102 infrastructure *must* respect grace periods, a     93 infrastructure *must* respect grace periods, and *must* invoke callbacks
103 from a known environment in which no locks are     94 from a known environment in which no locks are held.
104                                                    95 
105 Note that it *is* safe for synchronize_rcu() t     96 Note that it *is* safe for synchronize_rcu() to return immediately on
106 UP systems, including PREEMPT SMP builds runni     97 UP systems, including PREEMPT SMP builds running on UP systems.
107                                                    98 
108 Quick Quiz #3:                                     99 Quick Quiz #3:
109         Why can't synchronize_rcu() return imm    100         Why can't synchronize_rcu() return immediately on UP systems running
110         preemptible RCU?                       !! 101         preemptable RCU?
111                                                   102 
112 .. _answer_quick_quiz_up:                         103 .. _answer_quick_quiz_up:
113                                                   104 
114 Answer to Quick Quiz #1:                          105 Answer to Quick Quiz #1:
115         Why is it *not* legal to invoke synchr    106         Why is it *not* legal to invoke synchronize_rcu() in this case?
116                                                   107 
117         Because the calling function is scanni    108         Because the calling function is scanning an RCU-protected linked
118         list, and is therefore within an RCU r    109         list, and is therefore within an RCU read-side critical section.
119         Therefore, the called function has bee    110         Therefore, the called function has been invoked within an RCU
120         read-side critical section, and is not    111         read-side critical section, and is not permitted to block.
121                                                   112 
122 Answer to Quick Quiz #2:                          113 Answer to Quick Quiz #2:
123         What locking restriction must RCU call    114         What locking restriction must RCU callbacks respect?
124                                                   115 
125         Any lock that is acquired within an RC    116         Any lock that is acquired within an RCU callback must be acquired
126         elsewhere using an _bh variant of the     117         elsewhere using an _bh variant of the spinlock primitive.
127         For example, if "mylock" is acquired b    118         For example, if "mylock" is acquired by an RCU callback, then
128         a process-context acquisition of this     119         a process-context acquisition of this lock must use something
129         like spin_lock_bh() to acquire the loc    120         like spin_lock_bh() to acquire the lock.  Please note that
130         it is also OK to use _irq variants of     121         it is also OK to use _irq variants of spinlocks, for example,
131         spin_lock_irqsave().                      122         spin_lock_irqsave().
132                                                   123 
133         If the process-context code were to si    124         If the process-context code were to simply use spin_lock(),
134         then, since RCU callbacks can be invok    125         then, since RCU callbacks can be invoked from softirq context,
135         the callback might be called from a so    126         the callback might be called from a softirq that interrupted
136         the process-context critical section.     127         the process-context critical section.  This would result in
137         self-deadlock.                            128         self-deadlock.
138                                                   129 
139         This restriction might seem gratuitous    130         This restriction might seem gratuitous, since very few RCU
140         callbacks acquire locks directly.  How    131         callbacks acquire locks directly.  However, a great many RCU
141         callbacks do acquire locks *indirectly    132         callbacks do acquire locks *indirectly*, for example, via
142         the kfree() primitive.                    133         the kfree() primitive.
143                                                   134 
144 Answer to Quick Quiz #3:                          135 Answer to Quick Quiz #3:
145         Why can't synchronize_rcu() return imm    136         Why can't synchronize_rcu() return immediately on UP systems
146         running preemptible RCU?               !! 137         running preemptable RCU?
147                                                   138 
148         Because some other task might have bee    139         Because some other task might have been preempted in the middle
149         of an RCU read-side critical section.     140         of an RCU read-side critical section.  If synchronize_rcu()
150         simply immediately returned, it would     141         simply immediately returned, it would prematurely signal the
151         end of the grace period, which would c    142         end of the grace period, which would come as a nasty shock to
152         that other thread when it started runn    143         that other thread when it started running again.
                                                      

~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

kernel.org | git.kernel.org | LWN.net | Project Home | SVN repository | Mail admin

Linux® is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the United States and other countries.
TOMOYO® is a registered trademark of NTT DATA CORPORATION.

sflogo.php