2
0
mirror of https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git synced 2024-12-22 12:14:01 +08:00
linux-next/Documentation/RCU/rcu.txt

97 lines
3.9 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

RCU Concepts
The basic idea behind RCU (read-copy update) is to split destructive
operations into two parts, one that prevents anyone from seeing the data
item being destroyed, and one that actually carries out the destruction.
A "grace period" must elapse between the two parts, and this grace period
must be long enough that any readers accessing the item being deleted have
since dropped their references. For example, an RCU-protected deletion
from a linked list would first remove the item from the list, wait for
a grace period to elapse, then free the element. See the listRCU.txt
file for more information on using RCU with linked lists.
Frequently Asked Questions
o Why would anyone want to use RCU?
The advantage of RCU's two-part approach is that RCU readers need
not acquire any locks, perform any atomic instructions, write to
shared memory, or (on CPUs other than Alpha) execute any memory
barriers. The fact that these operations are quite expensive
on modern CPUs is what gives RCU its performance advantages
in read-mostly situations. The fact that RCU readers need not
acquire locks can also greatly simplify deadlock-avoidance code.
o How can the updater tell when a grace period has completed
if the RCU readers give no indication when they are done?
Just as with spinlocks, RCU readers are not permitted to
block, switch to user-mode execution, or enter the idle loop.
Therefore, as soon as a CPU is seen passing through any of these
three states, we know that that CPU has exited any previous RCU
read-side critical sections. So, if we remove an item from a
linked list, and then wait until all CPUs have switched context,
executed in user mode, or executed in the idle loop, we can
safely free up that item.
Preemptible variants of RCU (CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU) get the
same effect, but require that the readers manipulate CPU-local
counters. These counters allow limited types of blocking within
RCU read-side critical sections. SRCU also uses CPU-local
counters, and permits general blocking within RCU read-side
critical sections. These variants of RCU detect grace periods
by sampling these counters.
o If I am running on a uniprocessor kernel, which can only do one
thing at a time, why should I wait for a grace period?
See the UP.txt file in this directory.
o How can I see where RCU is currently used in the Linux kernel?
Search for "rcu_read_lock", "rcu_read_unlock", "call_rcu",
"rcu_read_lock_bh", "rcu_read_unlock_bh", "call_rcu_bh",
[PATCH] srcu-3: RCU variant permitting read-side blocking Updated patch adding a variant of RCU that permits sleeping in read-side critical sections. SRCU is as follows: o Each use of SRCU creates its own srcu_struct, and each srcu_struct has its own set of grace periods. This is critical, as it prevents one subsystem with a blocking reader from holding up SRCU grace periods for other subsystems. o The SRCU primitives (srcu_read_lock(), srcu_read_unlock(), and synchronize_srcu()) all take a pointer to a srcu_struct. o The SRCU primitives must be called from process context. o srcu_read_lock() returns an int that must be passed to the matching srcu_read_unlock(). Realtime RCU avoids the need for this by storing the state in the task struct, but SRCU needs to allow a given code path to pass through multiple SRCU domains -- storing state in the task struct would therefore require either arbitrary space in the task struct or arbitrary limits on SRCU nesting. So I kicked the state-storage problem up to the caller. Of course, it is not permitted to call synchronize_srcu() while in an SRCU read-side critical section. o There is no call_srcu(). It would not be hard to implement one, but it seems like too easy a way to OOM the system. (Hey, we have enough trouble with call_rcu(), which does -not- permit readers to sleep!!!) So, if you want it, please tell me why... [josht@us.ibm.com: sparse notation] Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-10-04 17:17:02 +08:00
"srcu_read_lock", "srcu_read_unlock", "synchronize_rcu",
"synchronize_net", "synchronize_srcu", and the other RCU
primitives. Or grab one of the cscope databases from:
http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/linuxusage/rculocktab.html
o What guidelines should I follow when writing code that uses RCU?
See the checklist.txt file in this directory.
o Why the name "RCU"?
"RCU" stands for "read-copy update". The file listRCU.txt has
more information on where this name came from, search for
"read-copy update" to find it.
o I hear that RCU is patented? What is with that?
Yes, it is. There are several known patents related to RCU,
search for the string "Patent" in RTFP.txt to find them.
Of these, one was allowed to lapse by the assignee, and the
others have been contributed to the Linux kernel under GPL.
There are now also LGPL implementations of user-level RCU
available (http://lttng.org/?q=node/18).
o I hear that RCU needs work in order to support realtime kernels?
This work is largely completed. Realtime-friendly RCU can be
enabled via the CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU kernel configuration
parameter. However, work is in progress for enabling priority
boosting of preempted RCU read-side critical sections. This is
needed if you have CPU-bound realtime threads.
o Where can I find more information on RCU?
See the RTFP.txt file in this directory.
Or point your browser at http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/.
o What are all these files in this directory?
See 00-INDEX for the list.