Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Jul 2014 09:50:09 +0800 | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/17] rcu: Allow post-unlock reference for rt_mutex |
| |
On 07/08/2014 06:38 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > The current approach to RCU priority boosting uses an rt_mutex strictly > for its priority-boosting side effects. The rt_mutex_init_proxy_locked() > function is used by the booster to initialize the lock as held by the > boostee. The booster then uses rt_mutex_lock() to acquire this rt_mutex, > which priority-boosts the boostee. When the boostee reaches the end > of its outermost RCU read-side critical section, it checks a field in > its task structure to see whether it has been boosted, and, if so, uses > rt_mutex_unlock() to release the rt_mutex. The booster can then go on > to boost the next task that is blocking the current RCU grace period. > > But reasonable implementations of rt_mutex_unlock() might result in the > boostee referencing the rt_mutex's data after releasing it.
XXXX_unlock(lock_ptr) should not reference to the lock_ptr after it has unlocked the lock. (*) So I think this patch is unneeded. Although its adding overhead is at slow-patch, but it adds REVIEW-burden.
And although the original rt_mutex_unlock() violates the rule(*) when the fast-cmpxchg-path, but it is fixed now.
It is the lock-subsystem's responsible to do this. I prefer to add the wait_for_complete() stuff until the future when the boostee needs to re-access the booster after rt_mutex_unlock() instead of now.
Thanks, Lai
| |