All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
	dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, cl@linux.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zhouchengming@bytedance.com, songmuchun@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu_ref: call wake_up_all() after percpu_ref_put() completes
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 09:40:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yk+SoZrwUGnQ3cI4@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220407155752.769632b737f79b038cf83742@linux-foundation.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 03:57:52PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> (cc Ming Lei)
> 
> On Thu,  7 Apr 2022 18:33:35 +0800 Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> wrote:
> 
> > In the percpu_ref_call_confirm_rcu(), we call the wake_up_all()
> > before calling percpu_ref_put(), which will cause the value of
> > percpu_ref to be unstable when percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync()
> > returns.
> > 
> > 	CPU0				CPU1
> > 
> > percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(&ref)
> > --> percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic(&ref)
> >     --> percpu_ref_get(ref);	/* put after confirmation */
> > 	call_rcu(&ref->data->rcu, percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu);
> > 
> > 					percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu
> > 					--> percpu_ref_call_confirm_rcu
> > 					    --> data->confirm_switch = NULL;
> > 						wake_up_all(&percpu_ref_switch_waitq);
> > 
> >     /* here waiting to wake up */
> >     wait_event(percpu_ref_switch_waitq, !ref->data->confirm_switch);
> > 						(A)percpu_ref_put(ref);
> > /* The value of &ref is unstable! */
> > percpu_ref_is_zero(&ref)
> > 						(B)percpu_ref_put(ref);
> > 
> > As shown above, assuming that the counts on each cpu add up to 0 before
> > calling percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync(), we expect that after switching
> > to atomic mode, percpu_ref_is_zero() can return true. But actually it will

Looks all current users expect the refcount is stable after percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync
returns, even though the API itself doesn't mention the point explicitly.

> > return different values in the two cases of A and B, which is not what
> > we expected.
> > 
> > Maybe the original purpose of percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync() is
> > just to ensure that the conversion to atomic mode is completed, but it
> > should not return with an extra reference count.
> > 
> > Calling wake_up_all() after percpu_ref_put() ensures that the value of
> > percpu_ref is stable after percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_sync() returns.
> > So just do it.
> 
> Thanks.  I'll grab this, but shall await input from others before doing
> anything else with it.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
> > +++ b/lib/percpu-refcount.c
> > @@ -154,13 +154,14 @@ static void percpu_ref_call_confirm_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> >  
> >  	data->confirm_switch(ref);
> >  	data->confirm_switch = NULL;
> > -	wake_up_all(&percpu_ref_switch_waitq);
> >  
> >  	if (!data->allow_reinit)
> >  		__percpu_ref_exit(ref);
> >  
> >  	/* drop ref from percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic() */
> >  	percpu_ref_put(ref);
> > +
> > +	wake_up_all(&percpu_ref_switch_waitq);
> >  }

Looks fine:

Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>


Thanks,
Ming


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-04-08  1:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-07 10:33 [PATCH] percpu_ref: call wake_up_all() after percpu_ref_put() completes Qi Zheng
2022-04-07 22:57 ` Andrew Morton
2022-04-08  0:39   ` Dennis Zhou
2022-04-08  1:40   ` Ming Lei [this message]
2022-04-08  2:54 ` Muchun Song
2022-04-08  3:50   ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-08  3:54     ` Andrew Morton
2022-04-08  4:06       ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-08  4:10         ` Andrew Morton
2022-04-08  4:14           ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-08  4:16             ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-08  5:57             ` Dennis Zhou
2022-04-08  6:28               ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-08 17:41 ` Tejun Heo
2022-04-08 19:19   ` Dennis Zhou
2022-04-09  0:40   ` Qi Zheng
2022-04-11  7:19     ` Qi Zheng

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=Yk+SoZrwUGnQ3cI4@T590 \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dennis@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    --cc=zhouchengming@bytedance.com \
    /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.