Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() [ver #2]

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: David Howells
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 - 4:51 pm

Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:


However, in one of the situations I'm thinking of, no lock is held.  All that
is being tested is whether the pointer to some RCU-protected data is either
NULL or non-NULL.  For example:

	@@ -345,7 +346,7 @@ int nfs_inode_return_delegation(struct inode *inode)
		struct nfs_delegation *delegation;
		int err = 0;

	-	if (rcu_dereference(nfsi->delegation) != NULL) {
	+	if (nfsi->delegation != NULL) {
			spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
			delegation = nfs_detach_delegation_locked(nfsi, NULL);
			spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);

No lock - RCU or spinlock - is held over the check of nfsi->delegation - which
causes lockdep to complain about an unguarded rcu_dereference().

However, the use of rcu_dereference() here is unnecessary with respect to the
interpolation (where appropriate) of a memory barrier because there is no
second memory access against which to order.

That said, the memory access is repeated inside nfs_detach_delegation_locked(),
which again was wrapped in an rcu_dereference():

	 static struct nfs_delegation *nfs_detach_delegation_locked(struct nfs_inode *nfsi, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
	 {
	-	struct nfs_delegation *delegation = rcu_dereference(nfsi->delegation);
	+	struct nfs_delegation *delegation = nfsi->delegation;

		if (delegation == NULL)
			goto nomatch;

which was not necessary for its memory barrier interpolation properties in this
case because of the spin_lock() the caller now holds.


Your suggestion of using rcu_dereference_check() in both these places would
result in two unnecessary memory barriers on something like an Alpha CPU.


How about:

	static struct nfs_delegation *nfs_detach_delegation_locked(struct nfs_inode *nfsi, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
	{
		struct nfs_delegation *delegation =
			rcu_locked_dereference(nfsi->delegation);
		...
	}

where rcu_locked_dereference() only does the lockdep magic and the dereference,
and does not include a memory barrier.  The documentation of such a function
would note this may only be used when the pointer is guarded by an exclusive
lock to prevent it from changing.

And then:

	int nfs_inode_return_delegation(struct inode *inode)
	{
		struct nfs_client *clp = NFS_SERVER(inode)->nfs_client;
		struct nfs_inode *nfsi = NFS_I(inode);
		struct nfs_delegation *delegation;
		int err = 0;

		if (rcu_pointer_not_null(nfsi->delegation)) {
			spin_lock(&clp->cl_lock);
			delegation = nfs_detach_delegation_locked(nfsi, NULL);
			spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
			if (delegation != NULL) {
				nfs_msync_inode(inode);
				err = __nfs_inode_return_delegation(inode, delegation, 1);
			}
		}
		return err;
	}

where rcu_pointer_not_null() simply tests the value of the pointer, casting
away the sparse RCU annotation and not doing the lockdep check and not
including a barrier.  It would not return the value of the pointer, thus
preventing you from needing the barrier as a result.

David
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_dele ..., Paul E. McKenney, (Mon Mar 29, 12:21 pm)
Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_dele ..., Paul E. McKenney, (Tue Mar 30, 10:01 am)
Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_dele ..., Paul E. McKenney, (Tue Mar 30, 10:25 am)
Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_dele ..., David Howells, (Tue Mar 30, 4:51 pm)
Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_dele ..., Paul E. McKenney, (Wed Mar 31, 11:30 am)
[No subject], David Howells, (Tue Apr 6, 9:14 am)
[No subject], Paul E. McKenney, (Tue Apr 6, 10:29 am)
RCU condition checks, David Howells, (Wed Apr 7, 9:35 am)
Re: RCU condition checks, Paul E. McKenney, (Wed Apr 7, 10:10 am)
Re: RCU condition checks, Trond Myklebust, (Sun Apr 11, 3:57 pm)
Re: RCU condition checks, Paul E. McKenney, (Mon Apr 12, 9:47 am)