[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[PATCH tip/core/rcu 8/9] doc: Emphasize that "toy" RCU requires recursive rwlock
Reported-by: "" <>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <>
Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
index 6b0337008f9c..8c131a1c62ea 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
@@ -562,7 +562,9 @@ This section presents a "toy" RCU implementation that is based on
familiar locking primitives. Its overhead makes it a non-starter for
real-life use, as does its lack of scalability. It is also unsuitable
for realtime use, since it allows scheduling latency to "bleed" from
-one read-side critical section to another.
+one read-side critical section to another. It also assumes recursive
+reader-writer locks: If you try this with non-recursive locks, and
+you allow nested rcu_read_lock() calls, you can deadlock.

However, it is probably the easiest implementation to relate to, so is
a good starting point.
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-12 18:43    [W:0.078 / U:5.992 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site