Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit :
>
> Paul, you acked this previously. Should I add you acked-by line so
> people calm down? If you would rather I replace
> rcu_dereference/rcu_assign_pointer with rmb/wmb, I can do this.
> Or maybe patch Documentation to explain this RCU usage?
>
So you believe I am over-reacting to this dubious use of RCU ?
RCU documentation is already very complex, we dont need to add yet another
subtle use, and makes it less readable.
It seems you use 'RCU api' in drivers/vhost/net.c as convenient macros :
#define rcu_dereference(p) ({ \
typeof(p) _________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \
smp_read_barrier_depends(); \
(_________p1); \
})
#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) \
({ \
if (!__builtin_constant_p(v) || \
((v) != NULL)) \
smp_wmb(); \
(p) = (v); \
})
There are plenty regular uses of smp_wmb() in kernel, not related to Read Copy Update,
there is nothing wrong to use barriers with appropriate comments.
(And you already use mb(), wmb(), rmb(), smp_wmb() in your patch)
BTW there is at least one locking bug in vhost_net_set_features()
Apparently, mutex_unlock() doesnt trigger a fault if mutex is not locked
by current thread... even with DEBUG_MUTEXES / DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
static void vhost_net_set_features(struct vhost_net *n, u64 features)
{
size_t hdr_size = features & (1 << VHOST_NET_F_VIRTIO_NET_HDR) ?
sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr) : 0;
int i;
<<!>> mutex_unlock(&n->dev.mutex);
n->dev.acked_features = features;
smp_wmb();
for (i = 0; i < VHOST_NET_VQ_MAX; ++i) {
mutex_lock(&n->vqs[i].mutex);
n->vqs[i].hdr_size = hdr_size;
mutex_unlock(&n->vqs[i].mutex);
}
mutex_unlock(&n->dev.mutex);
vhost_net_flush(n);
}
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
