diff options
| author | Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> | 2010-12-01 19:34:52 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com> | 2010-12-01 19:34:52 +0100 |
| commit | 04a6b516cdc6efc2500b52a540cf65be8c5aaf9e (patch) | |
| tree | fa5d6675308df0ff42eceeec1b406d2ce5eb2ff6 | |
| parent | d1ae8ffdfaa16b2ab2e9346e81cf0ab6eaaae347 (diff) | |
blk-throttle: Correct the placement of smp_rmb()
o I was discussing what are the variable being updated without spin lock and
why do we need barriers and Oleg pointed out that location of smp_rmb()
should be between read of td->limits_changed and tg->limits_changed. This
patch fixes it.
o Following is one possible sequence of events. Say cpu0 is executing
throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps() and cpu1 is executing
throtl_process_limit_change().
cpu0 cpu1
tg->limits_changed = true;
smp_mb__before_atomic_inc();
atomic_inc(&td->limits_changed);
if (!atomic_read(&td->limits_changed))
return;
if (tg->limits_changed)
do_something;
If cpu0 has updated tg->limits_changed and td->limits_changed, we want to
make sure that if update to td->limits_changed is visible on cpu1, then
update to tg->limits_changed should also be visible.
Oleg pointed out to ensure that we need to insert an smp_rmb() between
td->limits_changed read and tg->limits_changed read.
o I had erroneously put smp_rmb() before atomic_read(&td->limits_changed).
This patch fixes it.
Reported-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
| -rw-r--r-- | block/blk-throttle.c | 23 |
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/block/blk-throttle.c b/block/blk-throttle.c index 2d134b7c40a..381b09bb562 100644 --- a/block/blk-throttle.c +++ b/block/blk-throttle.c @@ -725,26 +725,21 @@ static void throtl_process_limit_change(struct throtl_data *td) struct throtl_grp *tg; struct hlist_node *pos, *n; - /* - * Make sure atomic_inc() effects from - * throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps(), group of functions are - * visible. - * Is this required or smp_mb__after_atomic_inc() was suffcient - * after the atomic_inc(). - */ - smp_rmb(); if (!atomic_read(&td->limits_changed)) return; throtl_log(td, "limit changed =%d", atomic_read(&td->limits_changed)); - hlist_for_each_entry_safe(tg, pos, n, &td->tg_list, tg_node) { - /* - * Do I need an smp_rmb() here to make sure tg->limits_changed - * update is visible. I am relying on smp_rmb() at the - * beginning of function and not putting a new one here. - */ + /* + * Make sure updates from throtl_update_blkio_group_read_bps() group + * of functions to tg->limits_changed are visible. We do not + * want update td->limits_changed to be visible but update to + * tg->limits_changed not being visible yet on this cpu. Hence + * the read barrier. + */ + smp_rmb(); + hlist_for_each_entry_safe(tg, pos, n, &td->tg_list, tg_node) { if (throtl_tg_on_rr(tg) && tg->limits_changed) { throtl_log_tg(td, tg, "limit change rbps=%llu wbps=%llu" " riops=%u wiops=%u", tg->bps[READ], |