diff options
| author | Andrea Parri | 2018-06-07 12:01:57 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Paul E. McKenney | 2018-07-12 15:39:23 -0700 |
| commit | 264d4f88ad5ba0d3c890a70a1216b4e87e5c26ec (patch) | |
| tree | 659d10c8f3612dec81d465cd0d8fb98087f59a61 /Documentation/RCU | |
| parent | 67abb96cbf307e16e3c6d1a0328ece085b5ce94c (diff) | |
doc: Update synchronize_rcu() definition in whatisRCU.txt
The synchronize_rcu() definition based on RW-locks in whatisRCU.txt
does not meet the "Memory-Barrier Guarantees" in Requirements.html;
for example, the following SB-like test:
P0: P1:
WRITE_ONCE(x, 1); WRITE_ONCE(y, 1);
synchronize_rcu(); smp_mb();
r0 = READ_ONCE(y); r1 = READ_ONCE(x);
should not be allowed to reach the state "r0 = 0 AND r1 = 0", but
the current write_lock()+write_unlock() definition can not ensure
this. This commit therefore inserts an smp_mb__after_spinlock()
in order to cause this synchronize_rcu() implementation to provide
this memory-barrier guarantee.
Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/RCU')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt | 16 |
1 files changed, 10 insertions, 6 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt index 65eb856526b7..94288f1b8759 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt +++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt @@ -588,6 +588,7 @@ It is extremely simple: void synchronize_rcu(void) { write_lock(&rcu_gp_mutex); + smp_mb__after_spinlock(); write_unlock(&rcu_gp_mutex); } @@ -609,12 +610,15 @@ don't forget about them when submitting patches making use of RCU!] The rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() primitive read-acquire and release a global reader-writer lock. The synchronize_rcu() -primitive write-acquires this same lock, then immediately releases -it. This means that once synchronize_rcu() exits, all RCU read-side -critical sections that were in progress before synchronize_rcu() was -called are guaranteed to have completed -- there is no way that -synchronize_rcu() would have been able to write-acquire the lock -otherwise. +primitive write-acquires this same lock, then releases it. This means +that once synchronize_rcu() exits, all RCU read-side critical sections +that were in progress before synchronize_rcu() was called are guaranteed +to have completed -- there is no way that synchronize_rcu() would have +been able to write-acquire the lock otherwise. The smp_mb__after_spinlock() +promotes synchronize_rcu() to a full memory barrier in compliance with +the "Memory-Barrier Guarantees" listed in: + + Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html. It is possible to nest rcu_read_lock(), since reader-writer locks may be recursively acquired. Note also that rcu_read_lock() is immune |