linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	"Oded Gabbay" <oded.gabbay@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: rename mmu_notifier_synchronize() to <...>_barrier()
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 12:18:33 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181105121833.200d5b53300a7ef4df7d349d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181105192955.26305-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>

On Mon,  5 Nov 2018 11:29:55 -0800 Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:

> ...and update its comment to explicitly reference its association with
> mmu_notifier_call_srcu().
> 
> Contrary to its name, mmu_notifier_synchronize() does not synchronize
> the notifier's SRCU instance, but rather waits for RCU callbacks to
> finished, i.e. it invokes rcu_barrier().  The RCU documentation is
> quite clear on this matter, explicitly calling out that rcu_barrier()
> does not imply synchronize_rcu().  The misnomer could lean an unwary
> developer to incorrectly assume that mmu_notifier_synchronize() can
> be used in conjunction with mmu_notifier_unregister_no_release() to
> implement a variation of mmu_notifier_unregister() that synchronizes
> SRCU without invoking ->release.  A Documentation-allergic and hasty
> developer could be further confused by the fact that rcu_barrier() is
> indeed a pass-through to synchronize_rcu()... in tiny SRCU.

Fair enough.

> --- a/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> +++ b/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> @@ -35,12 +35,12 @@ void mmu_notifier_call_srcu(struct rcu_head *rcu,
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmu_notifier_call_srcu);
>  
> -void mmu_notifier_synchronize(void)
> +void mmu_notifier_barrier(void)
>  {
> -	/* Wait for any running method to finish. */
> +	/* Wait for any running RCU callbacks (see above) to finish. */
>  	srcu_barrier(&srcu);
>  }
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmu_notifier_synchronize);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmu_notifier_barrier);
>  
>  /*
>   * This function can't run concurrently against mmu_notifier_register

But as it has no callers, why retain it?

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-05 20:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-05 19:29 [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: rename mmu_notifier_synchronize() to <...>_barrier() Sean Christopherson
2018-11-05 20:18 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2018-11-05 20:49   ` Sean Christopherson
2018-11-05 21:14   ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-11-06 13:34     ` Sean Christopherson
2018-11-06 13:26   ` Michal Hocko

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=20181105121833.200d5b53300a7ef4df7d349d@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=oded.gabbay@amd.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).