Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221214191355.GA2596199@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
 <20221215165452.GA1957735@lothringen> <20221215170834.GH4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
 <CAEXW_YTSW9kr3DsJm6hTQ0FfwVbVjzDa8=7H29+ysD10ZCbnHA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEXW_YTSW9kr3DsJm6hTQ0FfwVbVjzDa8=7H29+ysD10ZCbnHA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 17:58:14 +0000
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YQEZSdny005w314zNQMmS7MHMjp-WwAvV6k9hDhhzQmdA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] srcu: Yet more detail for srcu_readers_active_idx_check()
 comments
To:     paulmck@kernel.org
Cc:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
        neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com, urezki@gmail.com, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 5:48 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 5:08 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > > Scenario for the reader to increment the old idx once:
> > >
> > > _ Assume ssp->srcu_idx is initially 0.
> > > _ The READER reads idx that is 0
> > > _ The updater runs and flips the idx that is now 1
> > > _ The reader resumes with 0 as an index but on the next srcu_read_lock()
> > >   it will see the new idx which is 1
> > >
> > > What could be the scenario for it to increment the old idx twice?
> >
> > Unless I am missing something, the reader must reference the
> > srcu_unlock_count[old_idx] and then do smp_mb() before it will be
> > absolutely guaranteed of seeing the new value of ->srcu_idx.
>
> I think both of you are right depending on how the flip raced with the
> first reader's unlock in that specific task.
>
> If the first read section's srcu_read_unlock() and its corresponding
> smp_mb()  happened before the flip, then the increment of old idx
> would happen only once. The next srcu_read_lock() will read the new
> index. If the srcu_read_unlock() and it's corresponding smp_mb()
> happened after the flip, the old_idx will be sampled again and can be
> incremented twice. So it depends on how the flip races with
> srcu_read_unlock().

I am sorry this is inverted, but my statement's gist stands I believe:

1. Flip+smp_mb() happened before unlock's smp_mb() -- reader will not
increment old_idx the second time.

2. unlock()'s smp_mb() happened before Flip+smp_mb() , now the reader
has no new smp_mb() that happens AFTER the flip happened. So it can
totally sample the old idx again -- that particular reader will
increment twice, but the next time, it will see the flipped one.

Did I get that right? Thanks.