"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 11:49 AM Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Greg, >> >> "Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 04:52:24PM +0100, Gary Guo wrote: >> >> There is an operation needed by `block::mq`, atomically decreasing >> >> refcount from 2 to 0, which is not available through refcount.h, so >> >> I exposed `Refcount::as_atomic` which allows accessing the refcount >> >> directly. >> > >> > That's scary, and of course feels wrong on many levels, but: >> > >> > >> >> @@ -91,13 +95,17 @@ pub(crate) unsafe fn start_unchecked(this: &ARef<Self>) { >> >> /// C `struct request`. If the operation fails, `this` is returned in the >> >> /// `Err` variant. >> >> fn try_set_end(this: ARef<Self>) -> Result<*mut bindings::request, ARef<Self>> { >> >> - // We can race with `TagSet::tag_to_rq` >> >> - if let Err(_old) = this.wrapper_ref().refcount().compare_exchange( >> >> - 2, >> >> - 0, >> >> - Ordering::Relaxed, >> >> - Ordering::Relaxed, >> >> - ) { >> >> + // To hand back the ownership, we need the current refcount to be 2. >> >> + // Since we can race with `TagSet::tag_to_rq`, this needs to atomically reduce >> >> + // refcount to 0. `Refcount` does not provide a way to do this, so use the underlying >> >> + // atomics directly. >> >> + if this >> >> + .wrapper_ref() >> >> + .refcount() >> >> + .as_atomic() >> >> + .compare_exchange(2, 0, Ordering::Relaxed, Ordering::Relaxed) >> >> + .is_err() >> > >> > Why not just call rust_helper_refcount_set()? Or is the issue that you >> > think you might not be 2 here? And if you HAVE to be 2, why that magic >> > value (i.e. why not just always be 1 and rely on normal >> > increment/decrement?) >> > >> > I know some refcounts are odd in the kernel, but I don't see where the >> > block layer is caring about 2 as a refcount anywhere, what am I missing? >> >> It is in the documentation, rendered version available here [1]. Let me >> know if it is still unclear, then I guess we need to update the docs. >> >> Also, my session from Recipes has a little bit of discussion regarding >> this refcount and it's use [2]. >> >> Best regards, >> Andreas >> >> >> [1] https://rust.docs.kernel.org/kernel/block/mq/struct.Request.html#implementation-details >> [2] https://youtu.be/1LEvgkhU-t4?si=B1XnJhzCCNnUtRsI&t=1685 > > So it sounds like there is one refcount from the C side, and some > number of references from the Rust side. C side uses a different refcount field. That refcount never read by Rust, but it is guaranteed to be greater or equal to one while the driver owns the request. Rust uses a different refcount field to keep track of how many Rust references there is to a request. There is an implicit count while the driver owns the request. This count is not materialized as an `ARef` instance. > The function checks whether there's only one Rust reference left, and > if so, takes ownership of the value, correct? It checks if the `ARef` passed to the function is the last one in existence. If it is, it takes ownership of the `Request` object. > In that case, the CAS should have an acquire ordering to synchronize > with dropping the refcount 3->2 on another thread. Otherwise, you > might have a data race with the operations that happened just before > the 3->2 refcount drop. I am not sure. I don't think that the thread that does the CAS 2 -> 0 has any data dependencies to any thread that does the atomic decrement 3 -> 2. Any data dependencies between operations on the underlying C `struct request` would be synchronized by operations on the `ref` field of `struct request`, which is entirely managed block layer C code and the C functions called by the Rust abstractions. BR Andreas