On 12/03, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov a ?crit :
>
> Yes, but how is it related to RCU ?
> I mean, rcu_do_batch() is just a loop like others in kernel.
> The loop itself is not buggy, but can call a buggy function, you are right.
int start_me_again;
struct rcu_head rcu_head;
void rcu_func(struct rcu_head *rcu)
{
start_me_again = 1;
}
// could be called on arbitrary CPU
void check_start_me_again(void)
{
static spinlock_t lock;
spin_lock(lock);
if (start_me_again) {
start_me_again = 0;
call_rcu(&rcu_head, rcu_func);
}
spin_unlock(lock);
}
I'd say this code is not buggy.
In case it was not clear. I do not claim we need this patch (I don't know).
And yes, I very much doubt we can hit this problem in practice (even if I am
right).
What I don't agree with is that it is callback which should take care of this
problem.
> A smp_rmb() wont avoid all possible bugs...
For example?
Oleg.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
