srcu: Update comment after the index flip
Because there is not guaranteed to be a full memory barrier between
the ->srcu_unlock_count increment of an srcu_read_unlock() and the
->srcu_lock_count increment of the next srcu_read_lock(), this next
srcu_read_lock() is not guaranteed to see the effect of the index flip
just prior to this comment. However, this next srcu_read_lock() will
execute a full memory barrier, so the srcu_read_lock() after that is
guaranteed to see that index flip.
This guarantee is illustrated by the following diagram of events and
the litmus test following that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
READER UPDATER
------------- ----------
// idx is initially 0.
srcu_flip() {
smp_mb();
// RSCS
srcu_read_unlock() {
smp_mb();
idx++; // P
smp_mb(); // QQ
}
srcu_readers_unlock_idx(0) {
,--counted------------ count all unlock[0]; // Q
|
unlock[0]++; // X
}
smp_mb();
srcu_read_lock() {
READ(idx) = 0; ,---- count all lock[0]; // contributes imbalance of 1.
lock[0]++; ----counted |
smp_mb(); // PP } |
} |
|
// RSCS not going to effect above scan
|
srcu_read_unlock() { |
smp_mb(); |
unlock[0]++; |
} |
/
/
srcu_read_lock() { |
READ(idx); // Y -----cannot be counted because of P (has to sample idx as 1)
lock[1]++;
...
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This makes it similar to the store buffer pattern. Using X, Y, P and Q
annotated above, we get:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
READER UPDATER
X (write) P (write)
smp_mb(); //PP smp_mb(); //QQ
Y (read) Q (read)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASCII art courtesy of Joel Fernandes.
Reported-by: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Reported-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>