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;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] srcu: Yet more detail for srcu_readers_active_idx_check() comments
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 16:42:15 -0500
Message-Id: <8E05ED42-A391-48D3-97B3-FBD667E72D10@joelfernandes.org>
References: <20221215213900.GQ4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
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
In-Reply-To: <20221215213900.GQ4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
To:     paulmck@kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> On Dec 15, 2022, at 4:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 03:33:39PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:03 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> w=
rote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>=20
>>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 2:58 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> w=
rote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> 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().
>>>>=20
>>>> I do understand that a number of people like reasoning about
>>>> memory-barrier ordering, courtesy of the sequentially consistent portio=
ns
>>>> of the C and C++ memory models, but thinking in terms of the accesses
>>>> surrounding the memory barriers has been far less error-prone.
>>>=20
>>> 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.
>>>=20
>>>>> 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
>>>>=20
>>>> Nice!
>>>>=20
>>>> I suggest placing a gap between GP 2 and GP 3.  That way, you can make i=
t
>>>> 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 havin=
g
>>>> a reference to some data that is going to be freed at the end of GP 3).=

>>>>=20
>>>> I also suggest coloring Reader 1 red and Reader 2 green, given that the=

>>>> color red generally indicates danger.
>>>=20
>>> 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 :).
>>=20
>> I made these updates, please see: https://i.imgur.com/hoKLvtt.png
>>=20
>> Feel free to use the image for any purpose and thanks ;-)
>=20
> Very good, thank you!
>=20
> Would it be possible to have an arrow marked "X" or "reference to X"
> from the beginning of the 'Mark "x" for GC' box to the box labeled
> 'Enter RSCS (access "X")'?

I am currently away from desk. I shared the google drawing with you. Could y=
ou check and make the change, if that=E2=80=99s ok with you?

Thank you so much,

 - Joel

>=20
>                            Thanx, Paul