lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectConfused about hlist_unhashed_lockless()
Hi folks,

I just ran into c54a2744497d ("list: Add hlist_unhashed_lockless()")
but I'm a bit confused about what it's trying to achieve. It also seems
to have been merged without any callers (even in -next) -- was that
intentional?

My main source of confusion is the lack of memory barriers. For example,
if you look at the following pair of functions:


static inline int hlist_unhashed_lockless(const struct hlist_node *h)
{
return !READ_ONCE(h->pprev);
}

static inline void hlist_add_before(struct hlist_node *n,
struct hlist_node *next)
{
WRITE_ONCE(n->pprev, next->pprev);
WRITE_ONCE(n->next, next);
WRITE_ONCE(next->pprev, &n->next);
WRITE_ONCE(*(n->pprev), n);
}


Then running these two concurrently on the same node means that
hlist_unhashed_lockless() doesn't really tell you anything about whether
or not the node is reachable in the list (i.e. there is another node
with a next pointer pointing to it). In other words, I think all of
these outcomes are permitted:

hlist_unhashed_lockless(n) n reachable in list
0 0 (No reordering)
0 1 (No reordering)
1 0 (No reordering)
1 1 (Reorder first and last WRITE_ONCEs)

So I must be missing some details about the use-case here. Please could
you enlighten me? The RCU implementation permits only the first three
outcomes afaict, why not use that and leave non-RCU hlist as it was?

Cheers,

Will

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-31 17:44    [W:0.050 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site