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>
 <20221215195854.GL4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> <CAEXW_YSnwXA6Bn3Av3O0Tm=AnqKULGZJBA3Z7ZaLE814XABU6g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEXW_YSnwXA6Bn3Av3O0Tm=AnqKULGZJBA3Z7ZaLE814XABU6g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 15:33:39 -0500
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YSGWgkesu7xz8HXVmH82=uN1ESUdPs2Qtkv4isNjGy-Ww@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 3:03 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 2:58 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
> [...]
> > > 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 do understand that a number of people like reasoning about
> > memory-barrier ordering, courtesy of the sequentially consistent portions
> > of the C and C++ memory models, but thinking in terms of the accesses
> > surrounding the memory barriers has been far less error-prone.
>
> Sure, but we are already talking in terms of the access to idx right?
> That's what we're saying is visible by memory barriers and we are
> trying to reason here about the ordering (flip does the write to idx
> and followed by smp_mb(), and there is corresponding read of idx on
> the srcu_read_lock() side. So we are indeed talking in terms of
> access, but let me know if I missed something.
>
> > > Also, since this is all hard to reason about I started making some
> > > diagrams, LOL. For your amusement, here is why need to scan both idx
> > > during grace period detection: https://i.imgur.com/jz4bNKd.png
> >
> > Nice!
> >
> > I suggest placing a gap between GP 2 and GP 3.  That way, you can make it
> > very clear that Reader 1's critical section starts after the end of GP 2
> > (thus clearly never blocking GP 2) and before GP 3 (thus possibly having
> > a reference to some data that is going to be freed at the end of GP 3).
> >
> > I also suggest coloring Reader 1 red and Reader 2 green, given that the
> > color red generally indicates danger.
>
> Thanks for these suggestions! I will make the update. I am planning to
> make a number of diagrams for other scenarios as well, as it helps
> visualize. Google drawing is nice for these. I am happy to share these
> with you all if there is interest :).

I made these updates, please see: https://i.imgur.com/hoKLvtt.png

Feel free to use the image for any purpose and thanks ;-)

 - Joel