diff options
author | Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> | 2009-06-25 12:08:18 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> | 2009-07-03 04:02:29 -0400 |
commit | 240ebbf81f149b11a31e060ebe5ee51a3c775360 (patch) | |
tree | d8aa6601bd789991588e467bf734d40df36e1317 /Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | |
parent | 0acc512cb1a29636df5e982c7d845edafe77c2d0 (diff) |
rcu: Add synchronize_sched_expedited() rcutorture doc + updates
This patch updates the rcutorture documentation to include
updated output format. It also brings the RCU documentation up
to date.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: dada1@cosmosbay.com
Cc: zbr@ioremap.net
Cc: jeff.chua.linux@gmail.com
Cc: paulus@samba.org
Cc: laijs@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: jengelh@medozas.de
Cc: r000n@r000n.net
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca
LKML-Reference: <12459460983193-git-send-email->
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | 20 |
1 files changed, 15 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt index accfe2f5247d..51525a30e8b4 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt +++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt | |||
@@ -11,7 +11,10 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome! | |||
11 | structure is updated more than about 10% of the time, then | 11 | structure is updated more than about 10% of the time, then |
12 | you should strongly consider some other approach, unless | 12 | you should strongly consider some other approach, unless |
13 | detailed performance measurements show that RCU is nonetheless | 13 | detailed performance measurements show that RCU is nonetheless |
14 | the right tool for the job. | 14 | the right tool for the job. Yes, you might think of RCU |
15 | as simply cutting overhead off of the readers and imposing it | ||
16 | on the writers. That is exactly why normal uses of RCU will | ||
17 | do much more reading than updating. | ||
15 | 18 | ||
16 | Another exception is where performance is not an issue, and RCU | 19 | Another exception is where performance is not an issue, and RCU |
17 | provides a simpler implementation. An example of this situation | 20 | provides a simpler implementation. An example of this situation |
@@ -240,10 +243,11 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome! | |||
240 | instead need to use synchronize_irq() or synchronize_sched(). | 243 | instead need to use synchronize_irq() or synchronize_sched(). |
241 | 244 | ||
242 | 12. Any lock acquired by an RCU callback must be acquired elsewhere | 245 | 12. Any lock acquired by an RCU callback must be acquired elsewhere |
243 | with irq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave(). Failing to | 246 | with softirq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave(), |
244 | disable irq on a given acquisition of that lock will result in | 247 | spin_lock_bh(), etc. Failing to disable irq on a given |
245 | deadlock as soon as the RCU callback happens to interrupt that | 248 | acquisition of that lock will result in deadlock as soon as the |
246 | acquisition's critical section. | 249 | RCU callback happens to interrupt that acquisition's critical |
250 | section. | ||
247 | 251 | ||
248 | 13. RCU callbacks can be and are executed in parallel. In many cases, | 252 | 13. RCU callbacks can be and are executed in parallel. In many cases, |
249 | the callback code simply wrappers around kfree(), so that this | 253 | the callback code simply wrappers around kfree(), so that this |
@@ -310,3 +314,9 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome! | |||
310 | Because these primitives only wait for pre-existing readers, | 314 | Because these primitives only wait for pre-existing readers, |
311 | it is the caller's responsibility to guarantee safety to | 315 | it is the caller's responsibility to guarantee safety to |
312 | any subsequent readers. | 316 | any subsequent readers. |
317 | |||
318 | 16. The various RCU read-side primitives do -not- contain memory | ||
319 | barriers. The CPU (and in some cases, the compiler) is free | ||
320 | to reorder code into and out of RCU read-side critical sections. | ||
321 | It is the responsibility of the RCU update-side primitives to | ||
322 | deal with this. | ||