Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 30 Jan 2020 14:32:48 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@gmail.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] events: callchain: Use RCU API to access RCU pointer
Message-ID: <20200130133248.GW14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200129160813.14263-1-frextrite@gmail.com>
 <20200129160813.14263-2-frextrite@gmail.com>
 <20200129221909.GA74354@google.com>
 <20200130082321.GX14879@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200130101451.GA11015@workstation-portable>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200130101451.GA11015@workstation-portable>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 03:44:51PM +0530, Amol Grover wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/events/callchain.c b/kernel/events/callchain.c
> > > > index f91e1f41d25d..a672d02a1b3a 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/events/callchain.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/events/callchain.c
> > > > @@ -62,7 +62,8 @@ static void release_callchain_buffers(void)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	struct callchain_cpus_entries *entries;
> > > >  
> > > > -	entries = callchain_cpus_entries;
> > > > +	entries = rcu_dereference_protected(callchain_cpus_entries,
> > > > +					    lockdep_is_held(&callchain_mutex));
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> > 
> > Do we really need that smp_read_barrier_depends() here? Then again, I
> > don't suppose this is a fast path.
> > 
> 
> rcu_dereference_protected is actually a lightweight API and IIRC it
> omits the READ_ONCE() and hence the memory barriers.

Oh argh, indeed. I suppose I should've had more tea this morning.