lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 2/2] blk-throttle: Correct the placement of smp_rmb()
Date
o I was discussing what are the variable being updated without spin lock and
why do we need barriers and Oleg pointed out that location of smp_rmb()
should be between read of td->limits_changed and tg->limits_changed. This
patch fixes it.

o Following is one possible sequence of events. Say cpu0 is executing
throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps() and cpu1 is executing
throtl_process_limit_change().

cpu0 cpu1

tg->limits_changed = true;
smp_mb__before_atomic_inc();
atomic_inc(&td->limits_changed);

if (!atomic_read(&td->limits_changed))
return;

if (tg->limits_changed)
do_something;

If cpu0 has updated tg->limits_changed and td->limits_changed, we want to
make sure that if update to td->limits_changed is visible on cpu1, then
update to tg->limits_changed should also be visible.

Oleg pointed out to ensure that we need to insert an smp_rmb() between
td->limits_changed read and tg->limits_changed read.

o I had erroneously put smp_rmb() before atomic_read(&td->limits_changed).
This patch fixes it.

Reported-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
---
block/blk-throttle.c | 23 +++++++++--------------
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-throttle.c b/block/blk-throttle.c
index 2d134b7..381b09b 100644
--- a/block/blk-throttle.c
+++ b/block/blk-throttle.c
@@ -725,26 +725,21 @@ static void throtl_process_limit_change(struct throtl_data *td)
struct throtl_grp *tg;
struct hlist_node *pos, *n;

- /*
- * Make sure atomic_inc() effects from
- * throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps(), group of functions are
- * visible.
- * Is this required or smp_mb__after_atomic_inc() was suffcient
- * after the atomic_inc().
- */
- smp_rmb();
if (!atomic_read(&td->limits_changed))
return;

throtl_log(td, "limit changed =%d", atomic_read(&td->limits_changed));

- hlist_for_each_entry_safe(tg, pos, n, &td->tg_list, tg_node) {
- /*
- * Do I need an smp_rmb() here to make sure tg->limits_changed
- * update is visible. I am relying on smp_rmb() at the
- * beginning of function and not putting a new one here.
- */
+ /*
+ * Make sure updates from throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps() group
+ * of functions to tg->limits_changed are visible. We do not
+ * want update td->limits_changed to be visible but update to
+ * tg->limits_changed not being visible yet on this cpu. Hence
+ * the read barrier.
+ */
+ smp_rmb();

+ hlist_for_each_entry_safe(tg, pos, n, &td->tg_list, tg_node) {
if (throtl_tg_on_rr(tg) && tg->limits_changed) {
throtl_log_tg(td, tg, "limit change rbps=%llu wbps=%llu"
" riops=%u wiops=%u", tg->bps[READ],
--
1.7.2.3


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-30 17:59    [W:0.056 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site