All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
To: lbj <lbj137@yahoo.com>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu read lock question
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 08:20:42 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1791312961.77601.1618489242390.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <793BB53F-CE1B-4A8A-8D6D-850C7A144DBB@yahoo.com>

----- On Apr 13, 2021, at 11:19 PM, lttng-dev lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I have two different entities that are both protected by QSBR rcu: a policy and
> a hashtable. In the reclamation thread for the policy I would like to take a
> read lock so that I can safely iterate through the hashtable. I dont see
> anything wrong with this, but I just wanted to make sure it was ok since taking
> an rcu read lock in an rcu reclamation thread seems like it may be a bit
> suspect. Thanks for any insights, let me know if clarification is needed!

When you say "the reclamation thread for the policy", do you refer to a call-rcu
worker thread ?

Also, you are aware that RCU read-side lock/unlock are effectively no-ops for
QSBR rcu, right ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-15 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <13D87E55-7D1B-49B0-9555-656A837ADEB3.ref@yahoo.com>
2021-04-05 17:43 ` [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu question lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-06 20:05   ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-14  3:19     ` [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu read lock question lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 12:20       ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev [this message]
2021-04-15 12:41         ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 13:04           ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 14:54             ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 16:00               ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 18:11                 ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 19:26                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 20:58                     ` lbj via lttng-dev

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1791312961.77601.1618489242390.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org \
    --cc=lbj137@yahoo.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.