rcu: add documentation saying which RCU flavor to choose

Reported-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

1 files changed, 31 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
index cfaac34c4557..6ef692667e2f 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
@@ -849,6 +849,37 @@ All:  lockdep-checked RCU-protected pointer access
 See the comment headers in the source code (or the docbook generated
 from them) for more information.
 
+However, given that there are no fewer than four families of RCU APIs
+in the Linux kernel, how do you choose which one to use?  The following
+list can be helpful:
+
+a.      Will readers need to block?  If so, you need SRCU.
+
+b.      What about the -rt patchset?  If readers would need to block
+        in an non-rt kernel, you need SRCU.  If readers would block
+        in a -rt kernel, but not in a non-rt kernel, SRCU is not
+        necessary.
+
+c.      Do you need to treat NMI handlers, hardirq handlers,
+        and code segments with preemption disabled (whether
+        via preempt_disable(), local_irq_save(), local_bh_disable(),
+        or some other mechanism) as if they were explicit RCU readers?
+        If so, you need RCU-sched.
+
+d.      Do you need RCU grace periods to complete even in the face
+        of softirq monopolization of one or more of the CPUs?  For
+        example, is your code subject to network-based denial-of-service
+        attacks?  If so, you need RCU-bh.
+
+e.      Is your workload too update-intensive for normal use of
+        RCU, but inappropriate for other synchronization mechanisms?
+        If so, consider SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU.  But please be careful!
+
+f.      Otherwise, use RCU.
+
+Of course, this all assumes that you have determined that RCU is in fact
+the right tool for your job.
+
 
 8.  ANSWERS TO QUICK QUIZZES