From: "tip-bot2 for Paul E. McKenney" <tip-bot2@linutronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: core/rcu] rcu: Remove obsolete rcu_read_unlock() deadlock commentary
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:47:24 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <162506084486.395.2550238348410539595.tip-bot2@tip-bot2> (raw)
The following commit has been merged into the core/rcu branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 0223846010750e28e4330f1beefb5564ba406ef7
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/0223846010750e28e4330f1beefb5564ba406ef7
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
AuthorDate: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:30:49 -07:00
Committer: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
CommitterDate: Thu, 13 May 2021 09:13:23 -07:00
rcu: Remove obsolete rcu_read_unlock() deadlock commentary
The deferred quiescent states resulting from the consolidation of RCU-bh
and RCU-sched into RCU means that rcu_read_unlock() will no longer attempt
to acquire scheduler locks if interrupts were disabled across that call
to rcu_read_unlock(). The cautions in the rcu_read_unlock() header
comment are therefore obsolete. This commit therefore removes them.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 33 ++++++---------------------------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index f0eecb9..d9680b7 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -702,33 +702,12 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_read_lock(void)
/**
* rcu_read_unlock() - marks the end of an RCU read-side critical section.
*
- * In most situations, rcu_read_unlock() is immune from deadlock.
- * However, in kernels built with CONFIG_RCU_BOOST, rcu_read_unlock()
- * is responsible for deboosting, which it does via rt_mutex_unlock().
- * Unfortunately, this function acquires the scheduler's runqueue and
- * priority-inheritance spinlocks. This means that deadlock could result
- * if the caller of rcu_read_unlock() already holds one of these locks or
- * any lock that is ever acquired while holding them.
- *
- * That said, RCU readers are never priority boosted unless they were
- * preempted. Therefore, one way to avoid deadlock is to make sure
- * that preemption never happens within any RCU read-side critical
- * section whose outermost rcu_read_unlock() is called with one of
- * rt_mutex_unlock()'s locks held. Such preemption can be avoided in
- * a number of ways, for example, by invoking preempt_disable() before
- * critical section's outermost rcu_read_lock().
- *
- * Given that the set of locks acquired by rt_mutex_unlock() might change
- * at any time, a somewhat more future-proofed approach is to make sure
- * that that preemption never happens within any RCU read-side critical
- * section whose outermost rcu_read_unlock() is called with irqs disabled.
- * This approach relies on the fact that rt_mutex_unlock() currently only
- * acquires irq-disabled locks.
- *
- * The second of these two approaches is best in most situations,
- * however, the first approach can also be useful, at least to those
- * developers willing to keep abreast of the set of locks acquired by
- * rt_mutex_unlock().
+ * In almost all situations, rcu_read_unlock() is immune from deadlock.
+ * In recent kernels that have consolidated synchronize_sched() and
+ * synchronize_rcu_bh() into synchronize_rcu(), this deadlock immunity
+ * also extends to the scheduler's runqueue and priority-inheritance
+ * spinlocks, courtesy of the quiescent-state deferral that is carried
+ * out when rcu_read_unlock() is invoked with interrupts disabled.
*
* See rcu_read_lock() for more information.
*/
reply other threads:[~2021-06-30 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=162506084486.395.2550238348410539595.tip-bot2@tip-bot2 \
--to=tip-bot2@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@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 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).