From: Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/12] net: sched: flower: don't check for rtnl on head dereference
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:57:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vbf5zt6mwby.fsf@mellanox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpW9wv_0Rc96we2rkGGpeVnL3gJBxhQ9npuJ7WJsd8+MVQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon 25 Feb 2019 at 22:39, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:11 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri 22 Feb 2019 at 19:32, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > So if it is no longer RCU any more, why do you still use
>> > rcu_dereference_protected()? That is, why not just deref it as a raw
>> > pointer?
>
>
> Any answer for this question?
I decided that since there is neither possibility of concurrent pointer
assignment nor deallocation of object that it points to, most performant
solution would be using rcu_dereference_protected() which is the only
RCU dereference helper that doesn't use READ_ONCE. I now understand that
this is confusing (and most likely doesn't provide any noticeable
performance improvement anyway!) and will change this patch to use
rcu_dereference_raw() as you suggest.
>
>
>> >
>> > And, I don't think I can buy your argument here. The RCU infrastructure
>> > should not be changed even after your patches, the fast path is still
>> > protocted by RCU read lock, while the slow path now is protected by
>> > some smaller-scope locks. What makes cls_flower so unique that
>> > it doesn't even need RCU here? tp->root is not reassigned but it is still
>> > freed via RCU infra, that is in fl_destroy_sleepable().
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>>
>> My cls API patch set introduced reference counting for tcf_proto
>> structure. With that change tp->ops->destroy() (which calls fl_destroy()
>> and fl_destroy_sleepable(), in case of flower classifier) is only called
>> after last reference to tp is released. All slow path users of tp->ops
>> must obtain reference to tp, so concurrent call to fl_destroy() is not
>> possible. Before this change tcf_proto structure didn't have reference
>> counting support and required users to obtain rtnl mutex before calling
>> its ops callbacks. This was verified in flower by using rtnl_dereference
>> to obtain tp->root.
>
> Yes, but fast path doesn't hold a refnct of tp, does it? If not, you still
> rely on RCU for sync with readers. If yes, then probably RCU can be
> gone.
>
> Now you are in a middle of the two, that is taking RCU read lock on
> fast path without a refcnt, meanwhile still uses rcu_dereference on
> slow paths without any lock.
>
> For me, you at least don't use the RCU API correctly here.
>
> Thanks.
Yes, fast path still relies on RCU. What I meant is that slow path (cls
API) now only calls tp ops after obtaining reference to tp, so there is
no need to protect it from concurrent tp->ops->destroy() by means of
rtnl or any other lock. I understand that using
rcu_dereference_protected() is confusing in this case and will refactor
this patch appropriately.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-26 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-14 7:47 [PATCH net-next 00/12] Refactor flower classifier to remove dependency on rtnl lock Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 01/12] net: sched: flower: don't check for rtnl on head dereference Vlad Buslov
2019-02-18 19:08 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-19 9:45 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-20 22:33 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-21 17:45 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-22 19:32 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-25 16:11 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-25 22:39 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-26 14:57 ` Vlad Buslov [this message]
2019-02-28 0:49 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-28 18:35 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-03-02 0:51 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 02/12] net: sched: flower: refactor fl_change Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 20:34 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-15 10:38 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-15 10:47 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-15 16:25 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-18 18:20 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 03/12] net: sched: flower: introduce reference counting for filters Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 20:34 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-15 11:22 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-15 12:32 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 04/12] net: sched: flower: track filter deletion with flag Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 20:49 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-15 15:54 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 05/12] net: sched: flower: add reference counter to flower mask Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 06/12] net: sched: flower: handle concurrent mask insertion Vlad Buslov
2019-02-15 22:46 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 07/12] net: sched: flower: protect masks list with spinlock Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 08/12] net: sched: flower: handle concurrent filter insertion in fl_change Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 09/12] net: sched: flower: handle concurrent tcf proto deletion Vlad Buslov
2019-02-18 20:47 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-19 14:08 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 10/12] net: sched: flower: protect flower classifier state with spinlock Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 11/12] net: sched: flower: track rtnl lock state Vlad Buslov
2019-02-15 22:46 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-02-18 9:35 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-14 7:47 ` [PATCH net-next 12/12] net: sched: flower: set unlocked flag for flower proto ops Vlad Buslov
2019-02-18 19:27 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-19 10:15 ` Vlad Buslov
2019-02-20 22:36 ` Cong Wang
2019-02-18 19:15 ` [PATCH net-next 00/12] Refactor flower classifier to remove dependency on rtnl lock Cong Wang
2019-02-19 10:00 ` Vlad Buslov
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=vbf5zt6mwby.fsf@mellanox.com \
--to=vladbu@mellanox.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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).