]>
Commit | Line | Data |
---|---|---|
1da177e4 LT |
1 | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
2 | <!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.1.2//EN" | |
3 | "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd" []> | |
4 | ||
5 | <book id="LKLockingGuide"> | |
6 | <bookinfo> | |
7 | <title>Unreliable Guide To Locking</title> | |
8 | ||
9 | <authorgroup> | |
10 | <author> | |
11 | <firstname>Rusty</firstname> | |
12 | <surname>Russell</surname> | |
13 | <affiliation> | |
14 | <address> | |
15 | <email>rusty@rustcorp.com.au</email> | |
16 | </address> | |
17 | </affiliation> | |
18 | </author> | |
19 | </authorgroup> | |
20 | ||
21 | <copyright> | |
22 | <year>2003</year> | |
23 | <holder>Rusty Russell</holder> | |
24 | </copyright> | |
25 | ||
26 | <legalnotice> | |
27 | <para> | |
28 | This documentation is free software; you can redistribute | |
29 | it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public | |
30 | License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either | |
31 | version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later | |
32 | version. | |
33 | </para> | |
34 | ||
35 | <para> | |
36 | This program is distributed in the hope that it will be | |
37 | useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied | |
38 | warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. | |
39 | See the GNU General Public License for more details. | |
40 | </para> | |
41 | ||
42 | <para> | |
43 | You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public | |
44 | License along with this program; if not, write to the Free | |
45 | Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, | |
46 | MA 02111-1307 USA | |
47 | </para> | |
48 | ||
49 | <para> | |
50 | For more details see the file COPYING in the source | |
51 | distribution of Linux. | |
52 | </para> | |
53 | </legalnotice> | |
54 | </bookinfo> | |
55 | ||
56 | <toc></toc> | |
57 | <chapter id="intro"> | |
58 | <title>Introduction</title> | |
59 | <para> | |
60 | Welcome, to Rusty's Remarkably Unreliable Guide to Kernel | |
61 | Locking issues. This document describes the locking systems in | |
62 | the Linux Kernel in 2.6. | |
63 | </para> | |
64 | <para> | |
65 | With the wide availability of HyperThreading, and <firstterm | |
66 | linkend="gloss-preemption">preemption </firstterm> in the Linux | |
67 | Kernel, everyone hacking on the kernel needs to know the | |
68 | fundamentals of concurrency and locking for | |
69 | <firstterm linkend="gloss-smp"><acronym>SMP</acronym></firstterm>. | |
70 | </para> | |
71 | </chapter> | |
72 | ||
73 | <chapter id="races"> | |
74 | <title>The Problem With Concurrency</title> | |
75 | <para> | |
76 | (Skip this if you know what a Race Condition is). | |
77 | </para> | |
78 | <para> | |
79 | In a normal program, you can increment a counter like so: | |
80 | </para> | |
81 | <programlisting> | |
82 | very_important_count++; | |
83 | </programlisting> | |
84 | ||
85 | <para> | |
86 | This is what they would expect to happen: | |
87 | </para> | |
88 | ||
89 | <table> | |
90 | <title>Expected Results</title> | |
91 | ||
92 | <tgroup cols="2" align="left"> | |
93 | ||
94 | <thead> | |
95 | <row> | |
96 | <entry>Instance 1</entry> | |
97 | <entry>Instance 2</entry> | |
98 | </row> | |
99 | </thead> | |
100 | ||
101 | <tbody> | |
102 | <row> | |
103 | <entry>read very_important_count (5)</entry> | |
104 | <entry></entry> | |
105 | </row> | |
106 | <row> | |
107 | <entry>add 1 (6)</entry> | |
108 | <entry></entry> | |
109 | </row> | |
110 | <row> | |
111 | <entry>write very_important_count (6)</entry> | |
112 | <entry></entry> | |
113 | </row> | |
114 | <row> | |
115 | <entry></entry> | |
116 | <entry>read very_important_count (6)</entry> | |
117 | </row> | |
118 | <row> | |
119 | <entry></entry> | |
120 | <entry>add 1 (7)</entry> | |
121 | </row> | |
122 | <row> | |
123 | <entry></entry> | |
124 | <entry>write very_important_count (7)</entry> | |
125 | </row> | |
126 | </tbody> | |
127 | ||
128 | </tgroup> | |
129 | </table> | |
130 | ||
131 | <para> | |
132 | This is what might happen: | |
133 | </para> | |
134 | ||
135 | <table> | |
136 | <title>Possible Results</title> | |
137 | ||
138 | <tgroup cols="2" align="left"> | |
139 | <thead> | |
140 | <row> | |
141 | <entry>Instance 1</entry> | |
142 | <entry>Instance 2</entry> | |
143 | </row> | |
144 | </thead> | |
145 | ||
146 | <tbody> | |
147 | <row> | |
148 | <entry>read very_important_count (5)</entry> | |
149 | <entry></entry> | |
150 | </row> | |
151 | <row> | |
152 | <entry></entry> | |
153 | <entry>read very_important_count (5)</entry> | |
154 | </row> | |
155 | <row> | |
156 | <entry>add 1 (6)</entry> | |
157 | <entry></entry> | |
158 | </row> | |
159 | <row> | |
160 | <entry></entry> | |
161 | <entry>add 1 (6)</entry> | |
162 | </row> | |
163 | <row> | |
164 | <entry>write very_important_count (6)</entry> | |
165 | <entry></entry> | |
166 | </row> | |
167 | <row> | |
168 | <entry></entry> | |
169 | <entry>write very_important_count (6)</entry> | |
170 | </row> | |
171 | </tbody> | |
172 | </tgroup> | |
173 | </table> | |
174 | ||
175 | <sect1 id="race-condition"> | |
176 | <title>Race Conditions and Critical Regions</title> | |
177 | <para> | |
178 | This overlap, where the result depends on the | |
179 | relative timing of multiple tasks, is called a <firstterm>race condition</firstterm>. | |
180 | The piece of code containing the concurrency issue is called a | |
181 | <firstterm>critical region</firstterm>. And especially since Linux starting running | |
182 | on SMP machines, they became one of the major issues in kernel | |
183 | design and implementation. | |
184 | </para> | |
185 | <para> | |
186 | Preemption can have the same effect, even if there is only one | |
187 | CPU: by preempting one task during the critical region, we have | |
188 | exactly the same race condition. In this case the thread which | |
189 | preempts might run the critical region itself. | |
190 | </para> | |
191 | <para> | |
192 | The solution is to recognize when these simultaneous accesses | |
193 | occur, and use locks to make sure that only one instance can | |
194 | enter the critical region at any time. There are many | |
195 | friendly primitives in the Linux kernel to help you do this. | |
196 | And then there are the unfriendly primitives, but I'll pretend | |
197 | they don't exist. | |
198 | </para> | |
199 | </sect1> | |
200 | </chapter> | |
201 | ||
202 | <chapter id="locks"> | |
203 | <title>Locking in the Linux Kernel</title> | |
204 | ||
205 | <para> | |
206 | If I could give you one piece of advice: never sleep with anyone | |
207 | crazier than yourself. But if I had to give you advice on | |
208 | locking: <emphasis>keep it simple</emphasis>. | |
209 | </para> | |
210 | ||
211 | <para> | |
212 | Be reluctant to introduce new locks. | |
213 | </para> | |
214 | ||
215 | <para> | |
216 | Strangely enough, this last one is the exact reverse of my advice when | |
217 | you <emphasis>have</emphasis> slept with someone crazier than yourself. | |
218 | And you should think about getting a big dog. | |
219 | </para> | |
220 | ||
221 | <sect1 id="lock-intro"> | |
222 | <title>Two Main Types of Kernel Locks: Spinlocks and Semaphores</title> | |
223 | ||
224 | <para> | |
225 | There are two main types of kernel locks. The fundamental type | |
226 | is the spinlock | |
227 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/asm/spinlock.h</filename>), | |
228 | which is a very simple single-holder lock: if you can't get the | |
229 | spinlock, you keep trying (spinning) until you can. Spinlocks are | |
230 | very small and fast, and can be used anywhere. | |
231 | </para> | |
232 | <para> | |
233 | The second type is a semaphore | |
234 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/asm/semaphore.h</filename>): it | |
235 | can have more than one holder at any time (the number decided at | |
236 | initialization time), although it is most commonly used as a | |
237 | single-holder lock (a mutex). If you can't get a semaphore, | |
238 | your task will put itself on the queue, and be woken up when the | |
239 | semaphore is released. This means the CPU will do something | |
240 | else while you are waiting, but there are many cases when you | |
241 | simply can't sleep (see <xref linkend="sleeping-things"/>), and so | |
242 | have to use a spinlock instead. | |
243 | </para> | |
244 | <para> | |
245 | Neither type of lock is recursive: see | |
246 | <xref linkend="deadlock"/>. | |
247 | </para> | |
248 | </sect1> | |
249 | ||
250 | <sect1 id="uniprocessor"> | |
251 | <title>Locks and Uniprocessor Kernels</title> | |
252 | ||
253 | <para> | |
254 | For kernels compiled without <symbol>CONFIG_SMP</symbol>, and | |
255 | without <symbol>CONFIG_PREEMPT</symbol> spinlocks do not exist at | |
256 | all. This is an excellent design decision: when no-one else can | |
257 | run at the same time, there is no reason to have a lock. | |
258 | </para> | |
259 | ||
260 | <para> | |
261 | If the kernel is compiled without <symbol>CONFIG_SMP</symbol>, | |
262 | but <symbol>CONFIG_PREEMPT</symbol> is set, then spinlocks | |
263 | simply disable preemption, which is sufficient to prevent any | |
264 | races. For most purposes, we can think of preemption as | |
265 | equivalent to SMP, and not worry about it separately. | |
266 | </para> | |
267 | ||
268 | <para> | |
269 | You should always test your locking code with <symbol>CONFIG_SMP</symbol> | |
270 | and <symbol>CONFIG_PREEMPT</symbol> enabled, even if you don't have an SMP test box, because it | |
271 | will still catch some kinds of locking bugs. | |
272 | </para> | |
273 | ||
274 | <para> | |
275 | Semaphores still exist, because they are required for | |
276 | synchronization between <firstterm linkend="gloss-usercontext">user | |
277 | contexts</firstterm>, as we will see below. | |
278 | </para> | |
279 | </sect1> | |
280 | ||
281 | <sect1 id="usercontextlocking"> | |
282 | <title>Locking Only In User Context</title> | |
283 | ||
284 | <para> | |
285 | If you have a data structure which is only ever accessed from | |
286 | user context, then you can use a simple semaphore | |
287 | (<filename>linux/asm/semaphore.h</filename>) to protect it. This | |
288 | is the most trivial case: you initialize the semaphore to the number | |
289 | of resources available (usually 1), and call | |
290 | <function>down_interruptible()</function> to grab the semaphore, and | |
291 | <function>up()</function> to release it. There is also a | |
292 | <function>down()</function>, which should be avoided, because it | |
293 | will not return if a signal is received. | |
294 | </para> | |
295 | ||
296 | <para> | |
297 | Example: <filename>linux/net/core/netfilter.c</filename> allows | |
298 | registration of new <function>setsockopt()</function> and | |
299 | <function>getsockopt()</function> calls, with | |
300 | <function>nf_register_sockopt()</function>. Registration and | |
301 | de-registration are only done on module load and unload (and boot | |
302 | time, where there is no concurrency), and the list of registrations | |
303 | is only consulted for an unknown <function>setsockopt()</function> | |
304 | or <function>getsockopt()</function> system call. The | |
305 | <varname>nf_sockopt_mutex</varname> is perfect to protect this, | |
306 | especially since the setsockopt and getsockopt calls may well | |
307 | sleep. | |
308 | </para> | |
309 | </sect1> | |
310 | ||
311 | <sect1 id="lock-user-bh"> | |
312 | <title>Locking Between User Context and Softirqs</title> | |
313 | ||
314 | <para> | |
315 | If a <firstterm linkend="gloss-softirq">softirq</firstterm> shares | |
316 | data with user context, you have two problems. Firstly, the current | |
317 | user context can be interrupted by a softirq, and secondly, the | |
318 | critical region could be entered from another CPU. This is where | |
319 | <function>spin_lock_bh()</function> | |
320 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/linux/spinlock.h</filename>) is | |
321 | used. It disables softirqs on that CPU, then grabs the lock. | |
322 | <function>spin_unlock_bh()</function> does the reverse. (The | |
323 | '_bh' suffix is a historical reference to "Bottom Halves", the | |
324 | old name for software interrupts. It should really be | |
325 | called spin_lock_softirq()' in a perfect world). | |
326 | </para> | |
327 | ||
328 | <para> | |
329 | Note that you can also use <function>spin_lock_irq()</function> | |
330 | or <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function> here, which stop | |
331 | hardware interrupts as well: see <xref linkend="hardirq-context"/>. | |
332 | </para> | |
333 | ||
334 | <para> | |
335 | This works perfectly for <firstterm linkend="gloss-up"><acronym>UP | |
336 | </acronym></firstterm> as well: the spin lock vanishes, and this macro | |
337 | simply becomes <function>local_bh_disable()</function> | |
338 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/linux/interrupt.h</filename>), which | |
339 | protects you from the softirq being run. | |
340 | </para> | |
341 | </sect1> | |
342 | ||
343 | <sect1 id="lock-user-tasklet"> | |
344 | <title>Locking Between User Context and Tasklets</title> | |
345 | ||
346 | <para> | |
347 | This is exactly the same as above, because <firstterm | |
348 | linkend="gloss-tasklet">tasklets</firstterm> are actually run | |
349 | from a softirq. | |
350 | </para> | |
351 | </sect1> | |
352 | ||
353 | <sect1 id="lock-user-timers"> | |
354 | <title>Locking Between User Context and Timers</title> | |
355 | ||
356 | <para> | |
357 | This, too, is exactly the same as above, because <firstterm | |
358 | linkend="gloss-timers">timers</firstterm> are actually run from | |
359 | a softirq. From a locking point of view, tasklets and timers | |
360 | are identical. | |
361 | </para> | |
362 | </sect1> | |
363 | ||
364 | <sect1 id="lock-tasklets"> | |
365 | <title>Locking Between Tasklets/Timers</title> | |
366 | ||
367 | <para> | |
368 | Sometimes a tasklet or timer might want to share data with | |
369 | another tasklet or timer. | |
370 | </para> | |
371 | ||
372 | <sect2 id="lock-tasklets-same"> | |
373 | <title>The Same Tasklet/Timer</title> | |
374 | <para> | |
375 | Since a tasklet is never run on two CPUs at once, you don't | |
376 | need to worry about your tasklet being reentrant (running | |
377 | twice at once), even on SMP. | |
378 | </para> | |
379 | </sect2> | |
380 | ||
381 | <sect2 id="lock-tasklets-different"> | |
382 | <title>Different Tasklets/Timers</title> | |
383 | <para> | |
384 | If another tasklet/timer wants | |
385 | to share data with your tasklet or timer , you will both need to use | |
386 | <function>spin_lock()</function> and | |
387 | <function>spin_unlock()</function> calls. | |
388 | <function>spin_lock_bh()</function> is | |
389 | unnecessary here, as you are already in a tasklet, and | |
390 | none will be run on the same CPU. | |
391 | </para> | |
392 | </sect2> | |
393 | </sect1> | |
394 | ||
395 | <sect1 id="lock-softirqs"> | |
396 | <title>Locking Between Softirqs</title> | |
397 | ||
398 | <para> | |
399 | Often a softirq might | |
400 | want to share data with itself or a tasklet/timer. | |
401 | </para> | |
402 | ||
403 | <sect2 id="lock-softirqs-same"> | |
404 | <title>The Same Softirq</title> | |
405 | ||
406 | <para> | |
407 | The same softirq can run on the other CPUs: you can use a | |
408 | per-CPU array (see <xref linkend="per-cpu"/>) for better | |
409 | performance. If you're going so far as to use a softirq, | |
410 | you probably care about scalable performance enough | |
411 | to justify the extra complexity. | |
412 | </para> | |
413 | ||
414 | <para> | |
415 | You'll need to use <function>spin_lock()</function> and | |
416 | <function>spin_unlock()</function> for shared data. | |
417 | </para> | |
418 | </sect2> | |
419 | ||
420 | <sect2 id="lock-softirqs-different"> | |
421 | <title>Different Softirqs</title> | |
422 | ||
423 | <para> | |
424 | You'll need to use <function>spin_lock()</function> and | |
425 | <function>spin_unlock()</function> for shared data, whether it | |
426 | be a timer, tasklet, different softirq or the same or another | |
427 | softirq: any of them could be running on a different CPU. | |
428 | </para> | |
429 | </sect2> | |
430 | </sect1> | |
431 | </chapter> | |
432 | ||
433 | <chapter id="hardirq-context"> | |
434 | <title>Hard IRQ Context</title> | |
435 | ||
436 | <para> | |
437 | Hardware interrupts usually communicate with a | |
438 | tasklet or softirq. Frequently this involves putting work in a | |
439 | queue, which the softirq will take out. | |
440 | </para> | |
441 | ||
442 | <sect1 id="hardirq-softirq"> | |
443 | <title>Locking Between Hard IRQ and Softirqs/Tasklets</title> | |
444 | ||
445 | <para> | |
446 | If a hardware irq handler shares data with a softirq, you have | |
447 | two concerns. Firstly, the softirq processing can be | |
448 | interrupted by a hardware interrupt, and secondly, the | |
449 | critical region could be entered by a hardware interrupt on | |
450 | another CPU. This is where <function>spin_lock_irq()</function> is | |
451 | used. It is defined to disable interrupts on that cpu, then grab | |
452 | the lock. <function>spin_unlock_irq()</function> does the reverse. | |
453 | </para> | |
454 | ||
455 | <para> | |
456 | The irq handler does not to use | |
457 | <function>spin_lock_irq()</function>, because the softirq cannot | |
458 | run while the irq handler is running: it can use | |
459 | <function>spin_lock()</function>, which is slightly faster. The | |
460 | only exception would be if a different hardware irq handler uses | |
461 | the same lock: <function>spin_lock_irq()</function> will stop | |
462 | that from interrupting us. | |
463 | </para> | |
464 | ||
465 | <para> | |
466 | This works perfectly for UP as well: the spin lock vanishes, | |
467 | and this macro simply becomes <function>local_irq_disable()</function> | |
468 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/asm/smp.h</filename>), which | |
469 | protects you from the softirq/tasklet/BH being run. | |
470 | </para> | |
471 | ||
472 | <para> | |
473 | <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function> | |
474 | (<filename>include/linux/spinlock.h</filename>) is a variant | |
475 | which saves whether interrupts were on or off in a flags word, | |
476 | which is passed to <function>spin_unlock_irqrestore()</function>. This | |
477 | means that the same code can be used inside an hard irq handler (where | |
478 | interrupts are already off) and in softirqs (where the irq | |
479 | disabling is required). | |
480 | </para> | |
481 | ||
482 | <para> | |
483 | Note that softirqs (and hence tasklets and timers) are run on | |
484 | return from hardware interrupts, so | |
485 | <function>spin_lock_irq()</function> also stops these. In that | |
486 | sense, <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function> is the most | |
487 | general and powerful locking function. | |
488 | </para> | |
489 | ||
490 | </sect1> | |
491 | <sect1 id="hardirq-hardirq"> | |
492 | <title>Locking Between Two Hard IRQ Handlers</title> | |
493 | <para> | |
494 | It is rare to have to share data between two IRQ handlers, but | |
495 | if you do, <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function> should be | |
496 | used: it is architecture-specific whether all interrupts are | |
497 | disabled inside irq handlers themselves. | |
498 | </para> | |
499 | </sect1> | |
500 | ||
501 | </chapter> | |
502 | ||
503 | <chapter id="cheatsheet"> | |
504 | <title>Cheat Sheet For Locking</title> | |
505 | <para> | |
506 | Pete Zaitcev gives the following summary: | |
507 | </para> | |
508 | <itemizedlist> | |
509 | <listitem> | |
510 | <para> | |
511 | If you are in a process context (any syscall) and want to | |
512 | lock other process out, use a semaphore. You can take a semaphore | |
513 | and sleep (<function>copy_from_user*(</function> or | |
514 | <function>kmalloc(x,GFP_KERNEL)</function>). | |
515 | </para> | |
516 | </listitem> | |
517 | <listitem> | |
518 | <para> | |
519 | Otherwise (== data can be touched in an interrupt), use | |
520 | <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function> and | |
521 | <function>spin_unlock_irqrestore()</function>. | |
522 | </para> | |
523 | </listitem> | |
524 | <listitem> | |
525 | <para> | |
526 | Avoid holding spinlock for more than 5 lines of code and | |
527 | across any function call (except accessors like | |
528 | <function>readb</function>). | |
529 | </para> | |
530 | </listitem> | |
531 | </itemizedlist> | |
532 | ||
533 | <sect1 id="minimum-lock-reqirements"> | |
534 | <title>Table of Minimum Requirements</title> | |
535 | ||
536 | <para> The following table lists the <emphasis>minimum</emphasis> | |
537 | locking requirements between various contexts. In some cases, | |
538 | the same context can only be running on one CPU at a time, so | |
539 | no locking is required for that context (eg. a particular | |
540 | thread can only run on one CPU at a time, but if it needs | |
541 | shares data with another thread, locking is required). | |
542 | </para> | |
543 | <para> | |
544 | Remember the advice above: you can always use | |
545 | <function>spin_lock_irqsave()</function>, which is a superset | |
546 | of all other spinlock primitives. | |
547 | </para> | |
548 | <table> | |
549 | <title>Table of Locking Requirements</title> | |
550 | <tgroup cols="11"> | |
551 | <tbody> | |
552 | <row> | |
553 | <entry></entry> | |
554 | <entry>IRQ Handler A</entry> | |
555 | <entry>IRQ Handler B</entry> | |
556 | <entry>Softirq A</entry> | |
557 | <entry>Softirq B</entry> | |
558 | <entry>Tasklet A</entry> | |
559 | <entry>Tasklet B</entry> | |
560 | <entry>Timer A</entry> | |
561 | <entry>Timer B</entry> | |
562 | <entry>User Context A</entry> | |
563 | <entry>User Context B</entry> | |
564 | </row> | |
565 | ||
566 | <row> | |
567 | <entry>IRQ Handler A</entry> | |
568 | <entry>None</entry> | |
569 | </row> | |
570 | ||
571 | <row> | |
572 | <entry>IRQ Handler B</entry> | |
573 | <entry>spin_lock_irqsave</entry> | |
574 | <entry>None</entry> | |
575 | </row> | |
576 | ||
577 | <row> | |
578 | <entry>Softirq A</entry> | |
579 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
580 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
581 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
582 | </row> | |
583 | ||
584 | <row> | |
585 | <entry>Softirq B</entry> | |
586 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
587 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
588 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
589 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
590 | </row> | |
591 | ||
592 | <row> | |
593 | <entry>Tasklet A</entry> | |
594 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
595 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
596 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
597 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
598 | <entry>None</entry> | |
599 | </row> | |
600 | ||
601 | <row> | |
602 | <entry>Tasklet B</entry> | |
603 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
604 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
605 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
606 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
607 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
608 | <entry>None</entry> | |
609 | </row> | |
610 | ||
611 | <row> | |
612 | <entry>Timer A</entry> | |
613 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
614 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
615 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
616 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
617 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
618 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
619 | <entry>None</entry> | |
620 | </row> | |
621 | ||
622 | <row> | |
623 | <entry>Timer B</entry> | |
624 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
625 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
626 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
627 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
628 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
629 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
630 | <entry>spin_lock</entry> | |
631 | <entry>None</entry> | |
632 | </row> | |
633 | ||
634 | <row> | |
635 | <entry>User Context A</entry> | |
636 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
637 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
638 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
639 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
640 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
641 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
642 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
643 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
644 | <entry>None</entry> | |
645 | </row> | |
646 | ||
647 | <row> | |
648 | <entry>User Context B</entry> | |
649 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
650 | <entry>spin_lock_irq</entry> | |
651 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
652 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
653 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
654 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
655 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
656 | <entry>spin_lock_bh</entry> | |
657 | <entry>down_interruptible</entry> | |
658 | <entry>None</entry> | |
659 | </row> | |
660 | ||
661 | </tbody> | |
662 | </tgroup> | |
663 | </table> | |
664 | </sect1> | |
665 | </chapter> | |
666 | ||
667 | <chapter id="Examples"> | |
668 | <title>Common Examples</title> | |
669 | <para> | |
670 | Let's step through a simple example: a cache of number to name | |
671 | mappings. The cache keeps a count of how often each of the objects is | |
672 | used, and when it gets full, throws out the least used one. | |
673 | ||
674 | </para> | |
675 | ||
676 | <sect1 id="examples-usercontext"> | |
677 | <title>All In User Context</title> | |
678 | <para> | |
679 | For our first example, we assume that all operations are in user | |
680 | context (ie. from system calls), so we can sleep. This means we can | |
681 | use a semaphore to protect the cache and all the objects within | |
682 | it. Here's the code: | |
683 | </para> | |
684 | ||
685 | <programlisting> | |
686 | #include <linux/list.h> | |
687 | #include <linux/slab.h> | |
688 | #include <linux/string.h> | |
689 | #include <asm/semaphore.h> | |
690 | #include <asm/errno.h> | |
691 | ||
692 | struct object | |
693 | { | |
694 | struct list_head list; | |
695 | int id; | |
696 | char name[32]; | |
697 | int popularity; | |
698 | }; | |
699 | ||
700 | /* Protects the cache, cache_num, and the objects within it */ | |
701 | static DECLARE_MUTEX(cache_lock); | |
702 | static LIST_HEAD(cache); | |
703 | static unsigned int cache_num = 0; | |
704 | #define MAX_CACHE_SIZE 10 | |
705 | ||
706 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
707 | static struct object *__cache_find(int id) | |
708 | { | |
709 | struct object *i; | |
710 | ||
711 | list_for_each_entry(i, &cache, list) | |
712 | if (i->id == id) { | |
713 | i->popularity++; | |
714 | return i; | |
715 | } | |
716 | return NULL; | |
717 | } | |
718 | ||
719 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
720 | static void __cache_delete(struct object *obj) | |
721 | { | |
722 | BUG_ON(!obj); | |
723 | list_del(&obj->list); | |
724 | kfree(obj); | |
725 | cache_num--; | |
726 | } | |
727 | ||
728 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
729 | static void __cache_add(struct object *obj) | |
730 | { | |
731 | list_add(&obj->list, &cache); | |
732 | if (++cache_num > MAX_CACHE_SIZE) { | |
733 | struct object *i, *outcast = NULL; | |
734 | list_for_each_entry(i, &cache, list) { | |
735 | if (!outcast || i->popularity < outcast->popularity) | |
736 | outcast = i; | |
737 | } | |
738 | __cache_delete(outcast); | |
739 | } | |
740 | } | |
741 | ||
742 | int cache_add(int id, const char *name) | |
743 | { | |
744 | struct object *obj; | |
745 | ||
746 | if ((obj = kmalloc(sizeof(*obj), GFP_KERNEL)) == NULL) | |
747 | return -ENOMEM; | |
748 | ||
749 | strlcpy(obj->name, name, sizeof(obj->name)); | |
750 | obj->id = id; | |
751 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
752 | ||
753 | down(&cache_lock); | |
754 | __cache_add(obj); | |
755 | up(&cache_lock); | |
756 | return 0; | |
757 | } | |
758 | ||
759 | void cache_delete(int id) | |
760 | { | |
761 | down(&cache_lock); | |
762 | __cache_delete(__cache_find(id)); | |
763 | up(&cache_lock); | |
764 | } | |
765 | ||
766 | int cache_find(int id, char *name) | |
767 | { | |
768 | struct object *obj; | |
769 | int ret = -ENOENT; | |
770 | ||
771 | down(&cache_lock); | |
772 | obj = __cache_find(id); | |
773 | if (obj) { | |
774 | ret = 0; | |
775 | strcpy(name, obj->name); | |
776 | } | |
777 | up(&cache_lock); | |
778 | return ret; | |
779 | } | |
780 | </programlisting> | |
781 | ||
782 | <para> | |
783 | Note that we always make sure we have the cache_lock when we add, | |
784 | delete, or look up the cache: both the cache infrastructure itself and | |
785 | the contents of the objects are protected by the lock. In this case | |
786 | it's easy, since we copy the data for the user, and never let them | |
787 | access the objects directly. | |
788 | </para> | |
789 | <para> | |
790 | There is a slight (and common) optimization here: in | |
791 | <function>cache_add</function> we set up the fields of the object | |
792 | before grabbing the lock. This is safe, as no-one else can access it | |
793 | until we put it in cache. | |
794 | </para> | |
795 | </sect1> | |
796 | ||
797 | <sect1 id="examples-interrupt"> | |
798 | <title>Accessing From Interrupt Context</title> | |
799 | <para> | |
800 | Now consider the case where <function>cache_find</function> can be | |
801 | called from interrupt context: either a hardware interrupt or a | |
802 | softirq. An example would be a timer which deletes object from the | |
803 | cache. | |
804 | </para> | |
805 | <para> | |
806 | The change is shown below, in standard patch format: the | |
807 | <symbol>-</symbol> are lines which are taken away, and the | |
808 | <symbol>+</symbol> are lines which are added. | |
809 | </para> | |
810 | <programlisting> | |
811 | --- cache.c.usercontext 2003-12-09 13:58:54.000000000 +1100 | |
812 | +++ cache.c.interrupt 2003-12-09 14:07:49.000000000 +1100 | |
813 | @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ | |
814 | int popularity; | |
815 | }; | |
816 | ||
817 | -static DECLARE_MUTEX(cache_lock); | |
818 | +static spinlock_t cache_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED; | |
819 | static LIST_HEAD(cache); | |
820 | static unsigned int cache_num = 0; | |
821 | #define MAX_CACHE_SIZE 10 | |
822 | @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ | |
823 | int cache_add(int id, const char *name) | |
824 | { | |
825 | struct object *obj; | |
826 | + unsigned long flags; | |
827 | ||
828 | if ((obj = kmalloc(sizeof(*obj), GFP_KERNEL)) == NULL) | |
829 | return -ENOMEM; | |
830 | @@ -63,30 +64,33 @@ | |
831 | obj->id = id; | |
832 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
833 | ||
834 | - down(&cache_lock); | |
835 | + spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
836 | __cache_add(obj); | |
837 | - up(&cache_lock); | |
838 | + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
839 | return 0; | |
840 | } | |
841 | ||
842 | void cache_delete(int id) | |
843 | { | |
844 | - down(&cache_lock); | |
845 | + unsigned long flags; | |
846 | + | |
847 | + spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
848 | __cache_delete(__cache_find(id)); | |
849 | - up(&cache_lock); | |
850 | + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
851 | } | |
852 | ||
853 | int cache_find(int id, char *name) | |
854 | { | |
855 | struct object *obj; | |
856 | int ret = -ENOENT; | |
857 | + unsigned long flags; | |
858 | ||
859 | - down(&cache_lock); | |
860 | + spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
861 | obj = __cache_find(id); | |
862 | if (obj) { | |
863 | ret = 0; | |
864 | strcpy(name, obj->name); | |
865 | } | |
866 | - up(&cache_lock); | |
867 | + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
868 | return ret; | |
869 | } | |
870 | </programlisting> | |
871 | ||
872 | <para> | |
873 | Note that the <function>spin_lock_irqsave</function> will turn off | |
874 | interrupts if they are on, otherwise does nothing (if we are already | |
875 | in an interrupt handler), hence these functions are safe to call from | |
876 | any context. | |
877 | </para> | |
878 | <para> | |
879 | Unfortunately, <function>cache_add</function> calls | |
880 | <function>kmalloc</function> with the <symbol>GFP_KERNEL</symbol> | |
881 | flag, which is only legal in user context. I have assumed that | |
882 | <function>cache_add</function> is still only called in user context, | |
883 | otherwise this should become a parameter to | |
884 | <function>cache_add</function>. | |
885 | </para> | |
886 | </sect1> | |
887 | <sect1 id="examples-refcnt"> | |
888 | <title>Exposing Objects Outside This File</title> | |
889 | <para> | |
890 | If our objects contained more information, it might not be sufficient | |
891 | to copy the information in and out: other parts of the code might want | |
892 | to keep pointers to these objects, for example, rather than looking up | |
893 | the id every time. This produces two problems. | |
894 | </para> | |
895 | <para> | |
896 | The first problem is that we use the <symbol>cache_lock</symbol> to | |
897 | protect objects: we'd need to make this non-static so the rest of the | |
898 | code can use it. This makes locking trickier, as it is no longer all | |
899 | in one place. | |
900 | </para> | |
901 | <para> | |
902 | The second problem is the lifetime problem: if another structure keeps | |
903 | a pointer to an object, it presumably expects that pointer to remain | |
904 | valid. Unfortunately, this is only guaranteed while you hold the | |
905 | lock, otherwise someone might call <function>cache_delete</function> | |
906 | and even worse, add another object, re-using the same address. | |
907 | </para> | |
908 | <para> | |
909 | As there is only one lock, you can't hold it forever: no-one else would | |
910 | get any work done. | |
911 | </para> | |
912 | <para> | |
913 | The solution to this problem is to use a reference count: everyone who | |
914 | has a pointer to the object increases it when they first get the | |
915 | object, and drops the reference count when they're finished with it. | |
916 | Whoever drops it to zero knows it is unused, and can actually delete it. | |
917 | </para> | |
918 | <para> | |
919 | Here is the code: | |
920 | </para> | |
921 | ||
922 | <programlisting> | |
923 | --- cache.c.interrupt 2003-12-09 14:25:43.000000000 +1100 | |
924 | +++ cache.c.refcnt 2003-12-09 14:33:05.000000000 +1100 | |
925 | @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ | |
926 | struct object | |
927 | { | |
928 | struct list_head list; | |
929 | + unsigned int refcnt; | |
930 | int id; | |
931 | char name[32]; | |
932 | int popularity; | |
933 | @@ -17,6 +18,35 @@ | |
934 | static unsigned int cache_num = 0; | |
935 | #define MAX_CACHE_SIZE 10 | |
936 | ||
937 | +static void __object_put(struct object *obj) | |
938 | +{ | |
939 | + if (--obj->refcnt == 0) | |
940 | + kfree(obj); | |
941 | +} | |
942 | + | |
943 | +static void __object_get(struct object *obj) | |
944 | +{ | |
945 | + obj->refcnt++; | |
946 | +} | |
947 | + | |
948 | +void object_put(struct object *obj) | |
949 | +{ | |
950 | + unsigned long flags; | |
951 | + | |
952 | + spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
953 | + __object_put(obj); | |
954 | + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
955 | +} | |
956 | + | |
957 | +void object_get(struct object *obj) | |
958 | +{ | |
959 | + unsigned long flags; | |
960 | + | |
961 | + spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
962 | + __object_get(obj); | |
963 | + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
964 | +} | |
965 | + | |
966 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
967 | static struct object *__cache_find(int id) | |
968 | { | |
969 | @@ -35,6 +65,7 @@ | |
970 | { | |
971 | BUG_ON(!obj); | |
972 | list_del(&obj->list); | |
973 | + __object_put(obj); | |
974 | cache_num--; | |
975 | } | |
976 | ||
977 | @@ -63,6 +94,7 @@ | |
978 | strlcpy(obj->name, name, sizeof(obj->name)); | |
979 | obj->id = id; | |
980 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
981 | + obj->refcnt = 1; /* The cache holds a reference */ | |
982 | ||
983 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
984 | __cache_add(obj); | |
985 | @@ -79,18 +111,15 @@ | |
986 | spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
987 | } | |
988 | ||
989 | -int cache_find(int id, char *name) | |
990 | +struct object *cache_find(int id) | |
991 | { | |
992 | struct object *obj; | |
993 | - int ret = -ENOENT; | |
994 | unsigned long flags; | |
995 | ||
996 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
997 | obj = __cache_find(id); | |
998 | - if (obj) { | |
999 | - ret = 0; | |
1000 | - strcpy(name, obj->name); | |
1001 | - } | |
1002 | + if (obj) | |
1003 | + __object_get(obj); | |
1004 | spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1005 | - return ret; | |
1006 | + return obj; | |
1007 | } | |
1008 | </programlisting> | |
1009 | ||
1010 | <para> | |
1011 | We encapsulate the reference counting in the standard 'get' and 'put' | |
1012 | functions. Now we can return the object itself from | |
1013 | <function>cache_find</function> which has the advantage that the user | |
1014 | can now sleep holding the object (eg. to | |
1015 | <function>copy_to_user</function> to name to userspace). | |
1016 | </para> | |
1017 | <para> | |
1018 | The other point to note is that I said a reference should be held for | |
1019 | every pointer to the object: thus the reference count is 1 when first | |
1020 | inserted into the cache. In some versions the framework does not hold | |
1021 | a reference count, but they are more complicated. | |
1022 | </para> | |
1023 | ||
1024 | <sect2 id="examples-refcnt-atomic"> | |
1025 | <title>Using Atomic Operations For The Reference Count</title> | |
1026 | <para> | |
1027 | In practice, <type>atomic_t</type> would usually be used for | |
1028 | <structfield>refcnt</structfield>. There are a number of atomic | |
1029 | operations defined in | |
1030 | ||
1031 | <filename class="headerfile">include/asm/atomic.h</filename>: these are | |
1032 | guaranteed to be seen atomically from all CPUs in the system, so no | |
1033 | lock is required. In this case, it is simpler than using spinlocks, | |
1034 | although for anything non-trivial using spinlocks is clearer. The | |
1035 | <function>atomic_inc</function> and | |
1036 | <function>atomic_dec_and_test</function> are used instead of the | |
1037 | standard increment and decrement operators, and the lock is no longer | |
1038 | used to protect the reference count itself. | |
1039 | </para> | |
1040 | ||
1041 | <programlisting> | |
1042 | --- cache.c.refcnt 2003-12-09 15:00:35.000000000 +1100 | |
1043 | +++ cache.c.refcnt-atomic 2003-12-11 15:49:42.000000000 +1100 | |
1044 | @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ | |
1045 | struct object | |
1046 | { | |
1047 | struct list_head list; | |
1048 | - unsigned int refcnt; | |
1049 | + atomic_t refcnt; | |
1050 | int id; | |
1051 | char name[32]; | |
1052 | int popularity; | |
1053 | @@ -18,33 +18,15 @@ | |
1054 | static unsigned int cache_num = 0; | |
1055 | #define MAX_CACHE_SIZE 10 | |
1056 | ||
1057 | -static void __object_put(struct object *obj) | |
1058 | -{ | |
1059 | - if (--obj->refcnt == 0) | |
1060 | - kfree(obj); | |
1061 | -} | |
1062 | - | |
1063 | -static void __object_get(struct object *obj) | |
1064 | -{ | |
1065 | - obj->refcnt++; | |
1066 | -} | |
1067 | - | |
1068 | void object_put(struct object *obj) | |
1069 | { | |
1070 | - unsigned long flags; | |
1071 | - | |
1072 | - spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1073 | - __object_put(obj); | |
1074 | - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1075 | + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&obj->refcnt)) | |
1076 | + kfree(obj); | |
1077 | } | |
1078 | ||
1079 | void object_get(struct object *obj) | |
1080 | { | |
1081 | - unsigned long flags; | |
1082 | - | |
1083 | - spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1084 | - __object_get(obj); | |
1085 | - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1086 | + atomic_inc(&obj->refcnt); | |
1087 | } | |
1088 | ||
1089 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
1090 | @@ -65,7 +47,7 @@ | |
1091 | { | |
1092 | BUG_ON(!obj); | |
1093 | list_del(&obj->list); | |
1094 | - __object_put(obj); | |
1095 | + object_put(obj); | |
1096 | cache_num--; | |
1097 | } | |
1098 | ||
1099 | @@ -94,7 +76,7 @@ | |
1100 | strlcpy(obj->name, name, sizeof(obj->name)); | |
1101 | obj->id = id; | |
1102 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
1103 | - obj->refcnt = 1; /* The cache holds a reference */ | |
1104 | + atomic_set(&obj->refcnt, 1); /* The cache holds a reference */ | |
1105 | ||
1106 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1107 | __cache_add(obj); | |
1108 | @@ -119,7 +101,7 @@ | |
1109 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1110 | obj = __cache_find(id); | |
1111 | if (obj) | |
1112 | - __object_get(obj); | |
1113 | + object_get(obj); | |
1114 | spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1115 | return obj; | |
1116 | } | |
1117 | </programlisting> | |
1118 | </sect2> | |
1119 | </sect1> | |
1120 | ||
1121 | <sect1 id="examples-lock-per-obj"> | |
1122 | <title>Protecting The Objects Themselves</title> | |
1123 | <para> | |
1124 | In these examples, we assumed that the objects (except the reference | |
1125 | counts) never changed once they are created. If we wanted to allow | |
1126 | the name to change, there are three possibilities: | |
1127 | </para> | |
1128 | <itemizedlist> | |
1129 | <listitem> | |
1130 | <para> | |
1131 | You can make <symbol>cache_lock</symbol> non-static, and tell people | |
1132 | to grab that lock before changing the name in any object. | |
1133 | </para> | |
1134 | </listitem> | |
1135 | <listitem> | |
1136 | <para> | |
1137 | You can provide a <function>cache_obj_rename</function> which grabs | |
1138 | this lock and changes the name for the caller, and tell everyone to | |
1139 | use that function. | |
1140 | </para> | |
1141 | </listitem> | |
1142 | <listitem> | |
1143 | <para> | |
1144 | You can make the <symbol>cache_lock</symbol> protect only the cache | |
1145 | itself, and use another lock to protect the name. | |
1146 | </para> | |
1147 | </listitem> | |
1148 | </itemizedlist> | |
1149 | ||
1150 | <para> | |
1151 | Theoretically, you can make the locks as fine-grained as one lock for | |
1152 | every field, for every object. In practice, the most common variants | |
1153 | are: | |
1154 | </para> | |
1155 | <itemizedlist> | |
1156 | <listitem> | |
1157 | <para> | |
1158 | One lock which protects the infrastructure (the <symbol>cache</symbol> | |
1159 | list in this example) and all the objects. This is what we have done | |
1160 | so far. | |
1161 | </para> | |
1162 | </listitem> | |
1163 | <listitem> | |
1164 | <para> | |
1165 | One lock which protects the infrastructure (including the list | |
1166 | pointers inside the objects), and one lock inside the object which | |
1167 | protects the rest of that object. | |
1168 | </para> | |
1169 | </listitem> | |
1170 | <listitem> | |
1171 | <para> | |
1172 | Multiple locks to protect the infrastructure (eg. one lock per hash | |
1173 | chain), possibly with a separate per-object lock. | |
1174 | </para> | |
1175 | </listitem> | |
1176 | </itemizedlist> | |
1177 | ||
1178 | <para> | |
1179 | Here is the "lock-per-object" implementation: | |
1180 | </para> | |
1181 | <programlisting> | |
1182 | --- cache.c.refcnt-atomic 2003-12-11 15:50:54.000000000 +1100 | |
1183 | +++ cache.c.perobjectlock 2003-12-11 17:15:03.000000000 +1100 | |
1184 | @@ -6,11 +6,17 @@ | |
1185 | ||
1186 | struct object | |
1187 | { | |
1188 | + /* These two protected by cache_lock. */ | |
1189 | struct list_head list; | |
1190 | + int popularity; | |
1191 | + | |
1192 | atomic_t refcnt; | |
1193 | + | |
1194 | + /* Doesn't change once created. */ | |
1195 | int id; | |
1196 | + | |
1197 | + spinlock_t lock; /* Protects the name */ | |
1198 | char name[32]; | |
1199 | - int popularity; | |
1200 | }; | |
1201 | ||
1202 | static spinlock_t cache_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED; | |
1203 | @@ -77,6 +84,7 @@ | |
1204 | obj->id = id; | |
1205 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
1206 | atomic_set(&obj->refcnt, 1); /* The cache holds a reference */ | |
1207 | + spin_lock_init(&obj->lock); | |
1208 | ||
1209 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1210 | __cache_add(obj); | |
1211 | </programlisting> | |
1212 | ||
1213 | <para> | |
1214 | Note that I decide that the <structfield>popularity</structfield> | |
1215 | count should be protected by the <symbol>cache_lock</symbol> rather | |
1216 | than the per-object lock: this is because it (like the | |
1217 | <structname>struct list_head</structname> inside the object) is | |
1218 | logically part of the infrastructure. This way, I don't need to grab | |
1219 | the lock of every object in <function>__cache_add</function> when | |
1220 | seeking the least popular. | |
1221 | </para> | |
1222 | ||
1223 | <para> | |
1224 | I also decided that the <structfield>id</structfield> member is | |
1225 | unchangeable, so I don't need to grab each object lock in | |
1226 | <function>__cache_find()</function> to examine the | |
1227 | <structfield>id</structfield>: the object lock is only used by a | |
1228 | caller who wants to read or write the <structfield>name</structfield> | |
1229 | field. | |
1230 | </para> | |
1231 | ||
1232 | <para> | |
1233 | Note also that I added a comment describing what data was protected by | |
1234 | which locks. This is extremely important, as it describes the runtime | |
1235 | behavior of the code, and can be hard to gain from just reading. And | |
1236 | as Alan Cox says, <quote>Lock data, not code</quote>. | |
1237 | </para> | |
1238 | </sect1> | |
1239 | </chapter> | |
1240 | ||
1241 | <chapter id="common-problems"> | |
1242 | <title>Common Problems</title> | |
1243 | <sect1 id="deadlock"> | |
1244 | <title>Deadlock: Simple and Advanced</title> | |
1245 | ||
1246 | <para> | |
1247 | There is a coding bug where a piece of code tries to grab a | |
1248 | spinlock twice: it will spin forever, waiting for the lock to | |
1249 | be released (spinlocks, rwlocks and semaphores are not | |
1250 | recursive in Linux). This is trivial to diagnose: not a | |
1251 | stay-up-five-nights-talk-to-fluffy-code-bunnies kind of | |
1252 | problem. | |
1253 | </para> | |
1254 | ||
1255 | <para> | |
1256 | For a slightly more complex case, imagine you have a region | |
1257 | shared by a softirq and user context. If you use a | |
1258 | <function>spin_lock()</function> call to protect it, it is | |
1259 | possible that the user context will be interrupted by the softirq | |
1260 | while it holds the lock, and the softirq will then spin | |
1261 | forever trying to get the same lock. | |
1262 | </para> | |
1263 | ||
1264 | <para> | |
1265 | Both of these are called deadlock, and as shown above, it can | |
1266 | occur even with a single CPU (although not on UP compiles, | |
1267 | since spinlocks vanish on kernel compiles with | |
1268 | <symbol>CONFIG_SMP</symbol>=n. You'll still get data corruption | |
1269 | in the second example). | |
1270 | </para> | |
1271 | ||
1272 | <para> | |
1273 | This complete lockup is easy to diagnose: on SMP boxes the | |
1274 | watchdog timer or compiling with <symbol>DEBUG_SPINLOCKS</symbol> set | |
1275 | (<filename>include/linux/spinlock.h</filename>) will show this up | |
1276 | immediately when it happens. | |
1277 | </para> | |
1278 | ||
1279 | <para> | |
1280 | A more complex problem is the so-called 'deadly embrace', | |
1281 | involving two or more locks. Say you have a hash table: each | |
1282 | entry in the table is a spinlock, and a chain of hashed | |
1283 | objects. Inside a softirq handler, you sometimes want to | |
1284 | alter an object from one place in the hash to another: you | |
1285 | grab the spinlock of the old hash chain and the spinlock of | |
1286 | the new hash chain, and delete the object from the old one, | |
1287 | and insert it in the new one. | |
1288 | </para> | |
1289 | ||
1290 | <para> | |
1291 | There are two problems here. First, if your code ever | |
1292 | tries to move the object to the same chain, it will deadlock | |
1293 | with itself as it tries to lock it twice. Secondly, if the | |
1294 | same softirq on another CPU is trying to move another object | |
1295 | in the reverse direction, the following could happen: | |
1296 | </para> | |
1297 | ||
1298 | <table> | |
1299 | <title>Consequences</title> | |
1300 | ||
1301 | <tgroup cols="2" align="left"> | |
1302 | ||
1303 | <thead> | |
1304 | <row> | |
1305 | <entry>CPU 1</entry> | |
1306 | <entry>CPU 2</entry> | |
1307 | </row> | |
1308 | </thead> | |
1309 | ||
1310 | <tbody> | |
1311 | <row> | |
1312 | <entry>Grab lock A -> OK</entry> | |
1313 | <entry>Grab lock B -> OK</entry> | |
1314 | </row> | |
1315 | <row> | |
1316 | <entry>Grab lock B -> spin</entry> | |
1317 | <entry>Grab lock A -> spin</entry> | |
1318 | </row> | |
1319 | </tbody> | |
1320 | </tgroup> | |
1321 | </table> | |
1322 | ||
1323 | <para> | |
1324 | The two CPUs will spin forever, waiting for the other to give up | |
1325 | their lock. It will look, smell, and feel like a crash. | |
1326 | </para> | |
1327 | </sect1> | |
1328 | ||
1329 | <sect1 id="techs-deadlock-prevent"> | |
1330 | <title>Preventing Deadlock</title> | |
1331 | ||
1332 | <para> | |
1333 | Textbooks will tell you that if you always lock in the same | |
1334 | order, you will never get this kind of deadlock. Practice | |
1335 | will tell you that this approach doesn't scale: when I | |
1336 | create a new lock, I don't understand enough of the kernel | |
1337 | to figure out where in the 5000 lock hierarchy it will fit. | |
1338 | </para> | |
1339 | ||
1340 | <para> | |
1341 | The best locks are encapsulated: they never get exposed in | |
1342 | headers, and are never held around calls to non-trivial | |
1343 | functions outside the same file. You can read through this | |
1344 | code and see that it will never deadlock, because it never | |
1345 | tries to grab another lock while it has that one. People | |
1346 | using your code don't even need to know you are using a | |
1347 | lock. | |
1348 | </para> | |
1349 | ||
1350 | <para> | |
1351 | A classic problem here is when you provide callbacks or | |
1352 | hooks: if you call these with the lock held, you risk simple | |
1353 | deadlock, or a deadly embrace (who knows what the callback | |
1354 | will do?). Remember, the other programmers are out to get | |
1355 | you, so don't do this. | |
1356 | </para> | |
1357 | ||
1358 | <sect2 id="techs-deadlock-overprevent"> | |
1359 | <title>Overzealous Prevention Of Deadlocks</title> | |
1360 | ||
1361 | <para> | |
1362 | Deadlocks are problematic, but not as bad as data | |
1363 | corruption. Code which grabs a read lock, searches a list, | |
1364 | fails to find what it wants, drops the read lock, grabs a | |
1365 | write lock and inserts the object has a race condition. | |
1366 | </para> | |
1367 | ||
1368 | <para> | |
1369 | If you don't see why, please stay the fuck away from my code. | |
1370 | </para> | |
1371 | </sect2> | |
1372 | </sect1> | |
1373 | ||
1374 | <sect1 id="racing-timers"> | |
1375 | <title>Racing Timers: A Kernel Pastime</title> | |
1376 | ||
1377 | <para> | |
1378 | Timers can produce their own special problems with races. | |
1379 | Consider a collection of objects (list, hash, etc) where each | |
1380 | object has a timer which is due to destroy it. | |
1381 | </para> | |
1382 | ||
1383 | <para> | |
1384 | If you want to destroy the entire collection (say on module | |
1385 | removal), you might do the following: | |
1386 | </para> | |
1387 | ||
1388 | <programlisting> | |
1389 | /* THIS CODE BAD BAD BAD BAD: IF IT WAS ANY WORSE IT WOULD USE | |
1390 | HUNGARIAN NOTATION */ | |
1391 | spin_lock_bh(&list_lock); | |
1392 | ||
1393 | while (list) { | |
1394 | struct foo *next = list->next; | |
1395 | del_timer(&list->timer); | |
1396 | kfree(list); | |
1397 | list = next; | |
1398 | } | |
1399 | ||
1400 | spin_unlock_bh(&list_lock); | |
1401 | </programlisting> | |
1402 | ||
1403 | <para> | |
1404 | Sooner or later, this will crash on SMP, because a timer can | |
1405 | have just gone off before the <function>spin_lock_bh()</function>, | |
1406 | and it will only get the lock after we | |
1407 | <function>spin_unlock_bh()</function>, and then try to free | |
1408 | the element (which has already been freed!). | |
1409 | </para> | |
1410 | ||
1411 | <para> | |
1412 | This can be avoided by checking the result of | |
1413 | <function>del_timer()</function>: if it returns | |
1414 | <returnvalue>1</returnvalue>, the timer has been deleted. | |
1415 | If <returnvalue>0</returnvalue>, it means (in this | |
1416 | case) that it is currently running, so we can do: | |
1417 | </para> | |
1418 | ||
1419 | <programlisting> | |
1420 | retry: | |
1421 | spin_lock_bh(&list_lock); | |
1422 | ||
1423 | while (list) { | |
1424 | struct foo *next = list->next; | |
1425 | if (!del_timer(&list->timer)) { | |
1426 | /* Give timer a chance to delete this */ | |
1427 | spin_unlock_bh(&list_lock); | |
1428 | goto retry; | |
1429 | } | |
1430 | kfree(list); | |
1431 | list = next; | |
1432 | } | |
1433 | ||
1434 | spin_unlock_bh(&list_lock); | |
1435 | </programlisting> | |
1436 | ||
1437 | <para> | |
1438 | Another common problem is deleting timers which restart | |
1439 | themselves (by calling <function>add_timer()</function> at the end | |
1440 | of their timer function). Because this is a fairly common case | |
1441 | which is prone to races, you should use <function>del_timer_sync()</function> | |
1442 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/linux/timer.h</filename>) | |
1443 | to handle this case. It returns the number of times the timer | |
1444 | had to be deleted before we finally stopped it from adding itself back | |
1445 | in. | |
1446 | </para> | |
1447 | </sect1> | |
1448 | ||
1449 | </chapter> | |
1450 | ||
1451 | <chapter id="Efficiency"> | |
1452 | <title>Locking Speed</title> | |
1453 | ||
1454 | <para> | |
1455 | There are three main things to worry about when considering speed of | |
1456 | some code which does locking. First is concurrency: how many things | |
1457 | are going to be waiting while someone else is holding a lock. Second | |
1458 | is the time taken to actually acquire and release an uncontended lock. | |
1459 | Third is using fewer, or smarter locks. I'm assuming that the lock is | |
1460 | used fairly often: otherwise, you wouldn't be concerned about | |
1461 | efficiency. | |
1462 | </para> | |
1463 | <para> | |
1464 | Concurrency depends on how long the lock is usually held: you should | |
1465 | hold the lock for as long as needed, but no longer. In the cache | |
1466 | example, we always create the object without the lock held, and then | |
1467 | grab the lock only when we are ready to insert it in the list. | |
1468 | </para> | |
1469 | <para> | |
1470 | Acquisition times depend on how much damage the lock operations do to | |
1471 | the pipeline (pipeline stalls) and how likely it is that this CPU was | |
1472 | the last one to grab the lock (ie. is the lock cache-hot for this | |
1473 | CPU): on a machine with more CPUs, this likelihood drops fast. | |
1474 | Consider a 700MHz Intel Pentium III: an instruction takes about 0.7ns, | |
1475 | an atomic increment takes about 58ns, a lock which is cache-hot on | |
1476 | this CPU takes 160ns, and a cacheline transfer from another CPU takes | |
1477 | an additional 170 to 360ns. (These figures from Paul McKenney's | |
1478 | <ulink url="http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6993"> Linux | |
1479 | Journal RCU article</ulink>). | |
1480 | </para> | |
1481 | <para> | |
1482 | These two aims conflict: holding a lock for a short time might be done | |
1483 | by splitting locks into parts (such as in our final per-object-lock | |
1484 | example), but this increases the number of lock acquisitions, and the | |
1485 | results are often slower than having a single lock. This is another | |
1486 | reason to advocate locking simplicity. | |
1487 | </para> | |
1488 | <para> | |
1489 | The third concern is addressed below: there are some methods to reduce | |
1490 | the amount of locking which needs to be done. | |
1491 | </para> | |
1492 | ||
1493 | <sect1 id="efficiency-rwlocks"> | |
1494 | <title>Read/Write Lock Variants</title> | |
1495 | ||
1496 | <para> | |
1497 | Both spinlocks and semaphores have read/write variants: | |
1498 | <type>rwlock_t</type> and <structname>struct rw_semaphore</structname>. | |
1499 | These divide users into two classes: the readers and the writers. If | |
1500 | you are only reading the data, you can get a read lock, but to write to | |
1501 | the data you need the write lock. Many people can hold a read lock, | |
1502 | but a writer must be sole holder. | |
1503 | </para> | |
1504 | ||
1505 | <para> | |
1506 | If your code divides neatly along reader/writer lines (as our | |
1507 | cache code does), and the lock is held by readers for | |
1508 | significant lengths of time, using these locks can help. They | |
1509 | are slightly slower than the normal locks though, so in practice | |
1510 | <type>rwlock_t</type> is not usually worthwhile. | |
1511 | </para> | |
1512 | </sect1> | |
1513 | ||
1514 | <sect1 id="efficiency-read-copy-update"> | |
1515 | <title>Avoiding Locks: Read Copy Update</title> | |
1516 | ||
1517 | <para> | |
1518 | There is a special method of read/write locking called Read Copy | |
1519 | Update. Using RCU, the readers can avoid taking a lock | |
1520 | altogether: as we expect our cache to be read more often than | |
1521 | updated (otherwise the cache is a waste of time), it is a | |
1522 | candidate for this optimization. | |
1523 | </para> | |
1524 | ||
1525 | <para> | |
1526 | How do we get rid of read locks? Getting rid of read locks | |
1527 | means that writers may be changing the list underneath the | |
1528 | readers. That is actually quite simple: we can read a linked | |
1529 | list while an element is being added if the writer adds the | |
1530 | element very carefully. For example, adding | |
1531 | <symbol>new</symbol> to a single linked list called | |
1532 | <symbol>list</symbol>: | |
1533 | </para> | |
1534 | ||
1535 | <programlisting> | |
1536 | new->next = list->next; | |
1537 | wmb(); | |
1538 | list->next = new; | |
1539 | </programlisting> | |
1540 | ||
1541 | <para> | |
1542 | The <function>wmb()</function> is a write memory barrier. It | |
1543 | ensures that the first operation (setting the new element's | |
1544 | <symbol>next</symbol> pointer) is complete and will be seen by | |
1545 | all CPUs, before the second operation is (putting the new | |
1546 | element into the list). This is important, since modern | |
1547 | compilers and modern CPUs can both reorder instructions unless | |
1548 | told otherwise: we want a reader to either not see the new | |
1549 | element at all, or see the new element with the | |
1550 | <symbol>next</symbol> pointer correctly pointing at the rest of | |
1551 | the list. | |
1552 | </para> | |
1553 | <para> | |
1554 | Fortunately, there is a function to do this for standard | |
1555 | <structname>struct list_head</structname> lists: | |
1556 | <function>list_add_rcu()</function> | |
1557 | (<filename>include/linux/list.h</filename>). | |
1558 | </para> | |
1559 | <para> | |
1560 | Removing an element from the list is even simpler: we replace | |
1561 | the pointer to the old element with a pointer to its successor, | |
1562 | and readers will either see it, or skip over it. | |
1563 | </para> | |
1564 | <programlisting> | |
1565 | list->next = old->next; | |
1566 | </programlisting> | |
1567 | <para> | |
1568 | There is <function>list_del_rcu()</function> | |
1569 | (<filename>include/linux/list.h</filename>) which does this (the | |
1570 | normal version poisons the old object, which we don't want). | |
1571 | </para> | |
1572 | <para> | |
1573 | The reader must also be careful: some CPUs can look through the | |
1574 | <symbol>next</symbol> pointer to start reading the contents of | |
1575 | the next element early, but don't realize that the pre-fetched | |
1576 | contents is wrong when the <symbol>next</symbol> pointer changes | |
1577 | underneath them. Once again, there is a | |
1578 | <function>list_for_each_entry_rcu()</function> | |
1579 | (<filename>include/linux/list.h</filename>) to help you. Of | |
1580 | course, writers can just use | |
1581 | <function>list_for_each_entry()</function>, since there cannot | |
1582 | be two simultaneous writers. | |
1583 | </para> | |
1584 | <para> | |
1585 | Our final dilemma is this: when can we actually destroy the | |
1586 | removed element? Remember, a reader might be stepping through | |
1587 | this element in the list right now: it we free this element and | |
1588 | the <symbol>next</symbol> pointer changes, the reader will jump | |
1589 | off into garbage and crash. We need to wait until we know that | |
1590 | all the readers who were traversing the list when we deleted the | |
1591 | element are finished. We use <function>call_rcu()</function> to | |
1592 | register a callback which will actually destroy the object once | |
1593 | the readers are finished. | |
1594 | </para> | |
1595 | <para> | |
1596 | But how does Read Copy Update know when the readers are | |
1597 | finished? The method is this: firstly, the readers always | |
1598 | traverse the list inside | |
1599 | <function>rcu_read_lock()</function>/<function>rcu_read_unlock()</function> | |
1600 | pairs: these simply disable preemption so the reader won't go to | |
1601 | sleep while reading the list. | |
1602 | </para> | |
1603 | <para> | |
1604 | RCU then waits until every other CPU has slept at least once: | |
1605 | since readers cannot sleep, we know that any readers which were | |
1606 | traversing the list during the deletion are finished, and the | |
1607 | callback is triggered. The real Read Copy Update code is a | |
1608 | little more optimized than this, but this is the fundamental | |
1609 | idea. | |
1610 | </para> | |
1611 | ||
1612 | <programlisting> | |
1613 | --- cache.c.perobjectlock 2003-12-11 17:15:03.000000000 +1100 | |
1614 | +++ cache.c.rcupdate 2003-12-11 17:55:14.000000000 +1100 | |
1615 | @@ -1,15 +1,18 @@ | |
1616 | #include <linux/list.h> | |
1617 | #include <linux/slab.h> | |
1618 | #include <linux/string.h> | |
1619 | +#include <linux/rcupdate.h> | |
1620 | #include <asm/semaphore.h> | |
1621 | #include <asm/errno.h> | |
1622 | ||
1623 | struct object | |
1624 | { | |
1625 | - /* These two protected by cache_lock. */ | |
1626 | + /* This is protected by RCU */ | |
1627 | struct list_head list; | |
1628 | int popularity; | |
1629 | ||
1630 | + struct rcu_head rcu; | |
1631 | + | |
1632 | atomic_t refcnt; | |
1633 | ||
1634 | /* Doesn't change once created. */ | |
1635 | @@ -40,7 +43,7 @@ | |
1636 | { | |
1637 | struct object *i; | |
1638 | ||
1639 | - list_for_each_entry(i, &cache, list) { | |
1640 | + list_for_each_entry_rcu(i, &cache, list) { | |
1641 | if (i->id == id) { | |
1642 | i->popularity++; | |
1643 | return i; | |
1644 | @@ -49,19 +52,25 @@ | |
1645 | return NULL; | |
1646 | } | |
1647 | ||
1648 | +/* Final discard done once we know no readers are looking. */ | |
1649 | +static void cache_delete_rcu(void *arg) | |
1650 | +{ | |
1651 | + object_put(arg); | |
1652 | +} | |
1653 | + | |
1654 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
1655 | static void __cache_delete(struct object *obj) | |
1656 | { | |
1657 | BUG_ON(!obj); | |
1658 | - list_del(&obj->list); | |
1659 | - object_put(obj); | |
1660 | + list_del_rcu(&obj->list); | |
1661 | cache_num--; | |
1662 | + call_rcu(&obj->rcu, cache_delete_rcu, obj); | |
1663 | } | |
1664 | ||
1665 | /* Must be holding cache_lock */ | |
1666 | static void __cache_add(struct object *obj) | |
1667 | { | |
1668 | - list_add(&obj->list, &cache); | |
1669 | + list_add_rcu(&obj->list, &cache); | |
1670 | if (++cache_num > MAX_CACHE_SIZE) { | |
1671 | struct object *i, *outcast = NULL; | |
1672 | list_for_each_entry(i, &cache, list) { | |
1673 | @@ -85,6 +94,7 @@ | |
1674 | obj->popularity = 0; | |
1675 | atomic_set(&obj->refcnt, 1); /* The cache holds a reference */ | |
1676 | spin_lock_init(&obj->lock); | |
1677 | + INIT_RCU_HEAD(&obj->rcu); | |
1678 | ||
1679 | spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1680 | __cache_add(obj); | |
1681 | @@ -104,12 +114,11 @@ | |
1682 | struct object *cache_find(int id) | |
1683 | { | |
1684 | struct object *obj; | |
1685 | - unsigned long flags; | |
1686 | ||
1687 | - spin_lock_irqsave(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1688 | + rcu_read_lock(); | |
1689 | obj = __cache_find(id); | |
1690 | if (obj) | |
1691 | object_get(obj); | |
1692 | - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cache_lock, flags); | |
1693 | + rcu_read_unlock(); | |
1694 | return obj; | |
1695 | } | |
1696 | </programlisting> | |
1697 | ||
1698 | <para> | |
1699 | Note that the reader will alter the | |
1700 | <structfield>popularity</structfield> member in | |
1701 | <function>__cache_find()</function>, and now it doesn't hold a lock. | |
1702 | One solution would be to make it an <type>atomic_t</type>, but for | |
1703 | this usage, we don't really care about races: an approximate result is | |
1704 | good enough, so I didn't change it. | |
1705 | </para> | |
1706 | ||
1707 | <para> | |
1708 | The result is that <function>cache_find()</function> requires no | |
1709 | synchronization with any other functions, so is almost as fast on SMP | |
1710 | as it would be on UP. | |
1711 | </para> | |
1712 | ||
1713 | <para> | |
1714 | There is a furthur optimization possible here: remember our original | |
1715 | cache code, where there were no reference counts and the caller simply | |
1716 | held the lock whenever using the object? This is still possible: if | |
1717 | you hold the lock, noone can delete the object, so you don't need to | |
1718 | get and put the reference count. | |
1719 | </para> | |
1720 | ||
1721 | <para> | |
1722 | Now, because the 'read lock' in RCU is simply disabling preemption, a | |
1723 | caller which always has preemption disabled between calling | |
1724 | <function>cache_find()</function> and | |
1725 | <function>object_put()</function> does not need to actually get and | |
1726 | put the reference count: we could expose | |
1727 | <function>__cache_find()</function> by making it non-static, and | |
1728 | such callers could simply call that. | |
1729 | </para> | |
1730 | <para> | |
1731 | The benefit here is that the reference count is not written to: the | |
1732 | object is not altered in any way, which is much faster on SMP | |
1733 | machines due to caching. | |
1734 | </para> | |
1735 | </sect1> | |
1736 | ||
1737 | <sect1 id="per-cpu"> | |
1738 | <title>Per-CPU Data</title> | |
1739 | ||
1740 | <para> | |
1741 | Another technique for avoiding locking which is used fairly | |
1742 | widely is to duplicate information for each CPU. For example, | |
1743 | if you wanted to keep a count of a common condition, you could | |
1744 | use a spin lock and a single counter. Nice and simple. | |
1745 | </para> | |
1746 | ||
1747 | <para> | |
1748 | If that was too slow (it's usually not, but if you've got a | |
1749 | really big machine to test on and can show that it is), you | |
1750 | could instead use a counter for each CPU, then none of them need | |
1751 | an exclusive lock. See <function>DEFINE_PER_CPU()</function>, | |
1752 | <function>get_cpu_var()</function> and | |
1753 | <function>put_cpu_var()</function> | |
1754 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/linux/percpu.h</filename>). | |
1755 | </para> | |
1756 | ||
1757 | <para> | |
1758 | Of particular use for simple per-cpu counters is the | |
1759 | <type>local_t</type> type, and the | |
1760 | <function>cpu_local_inc()</function> and related functions, | |
1761 | which are more efficient than simple code on some architectures | |
1762 | (<filename class="headerfile">include/asm/local.h</filename>). | |
1763 | </para> | |
1764 | ||
1765 | <para> | |
1766 | Note that there is no simple, reliable way of getting an exact | |
1767 | value of such a counter, without introducing more locks. This | |
1768 | is not a problem for some uses. | |
1769 | </para> | |
1770 | </sect1> | |
1771 | ||
1772 | <sect1 id="mostly-hardirq"> | |
1773 | <title>Data Which Mostly Used By An IRQ Handler</title> | |
1774 | ||
1775 | <para> | |
1776 | If data is always accessed from within the same IRQ handler, you | |
1777 | don't need a lock at all: the kernel already guarantees that the | |
1778 | irq handler will not run simultaneously on multiple CPUs. | |
1779 | </para> | |
1780 | <para> | |
1781 | Manfred Spraul points out that you can still do this, even if | |
1782 | the data is very occasionally accessed in user context or | |
1783 | softirqs/tasklets. The irq handler doesn't use a lock, and | |
1784 | all other accesses are done as so: | |
1785 | </para> | |
1786 | ||
1787 | <programlisting> | |
1788 | spin_lock(&lock); | |
1789 | disable_irq(irq); | |
1790 | ... | |
1791 | enable_irq(irq); | |
1792 | spin_unlock(&lock); | |
1793 | </programlisting> | |
1794 | <para> | |
1795 | The <function>disable_irq()</function> prevents the irq handler | |
1796 | from running (and waits for it to finish if it's currently | |
1797 | running on other CPUs). The spinlock prevents any other | |
1798 | accesses happening at the same time. Naturally, this is slower | |
1799 | than just a <function>spin_lock_irq()</function> call, so it | |
1800 | only makes sense if this type of access happens extremely | |
1801 | rarely. | |
1802 | </para> | |
1803 | </sect1> | |
1804 | </chapter> | |
1805 | ||
1806 | <chapter id="sleeping-things"> | |
1807 | <title>What Functions Are Safe To Call From Interrupts?</title> | |
1808 | ||
1809 | <para> | |
1810 | Many functions in the kernel sleep (ie. call schedule()) | |
1811 | directly or indirectly: you can never call them while holding a | |
1812 | spinlock, or with preemption disabled. This also means you need | |
1813 | to be in user context: calling them from an interrupt is illegal. | |
1814 | </para> | |
1815 | ||
1816 | <sect1 id="sleeping"> | |
1817 | <title>Some Functions Which Sleep</title> | |
1818 | ||
1819 | <para> | |
1820 | The most common ones are listed below, but you usually have to | |
1821 | read the code to find out if other calls are safe. If everyone | |
1822 | else who calls it can sleep, you probably need to be able to | |
1823 | sleep, too. In particular, registration and deregistration | |
1824 | functions usually expect to be called from user context, and can | |
1825 | sleep. | |
1826 | </para> | |
1827 | ||
1828 | <itemizedlist> | |
1829 | <listitem> | |
1830 | <para> | |
1831 | Accesses to | |
1832 | <firstterm linkend="gloss-userspace">userspace</firstterm>: | |
1833 | </para> | |
1834 | <itemizedlist> | |
1835 | <listitem> | |
1836 | <para> | |
1837 | <function>copy_from_user()</function> | |
1838 | </para> | |
1839 | </listitem> | |
1840 | <listitem> | |
1841 | <para> | |
1842 | <function>copy_to_user()</function> | |
1843 | </para> | |
1844 | </listitem> | |
1845 | <listitem> | |
1846 | <para> | |
1847 | <function>get_user()</function> | |
1848 | </para> | |
1849 | </listitem> | |
1850 | <listitem> | |
1851 | <para> | |
1852 | <function> put_user()</function> | |
1853 | </para> | |
1854 | </listitem> | |
1855 | </itemizedlist> | |
1856 | </listitem> | |
1857 | ||
1858 | <listitem> | |
1859 | <para> | |
1860 | <function>kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL)</function> | |
1861 | </para> | |
1862 | </listitem> | |
1863 | ||
1864 | <listitem> | |
1865 | <para> | |
1866 | <function>down_interruptible()</function> and | |
1867 | <function>down()</function> | |
1868 | </para> | |
1869 | <para> | |
1870 | There is a <function>down_trylock()</function> which can be | |
1871 | used inside interrupt context, as it will not sleep. | |
1872 | <function>up()</function> will also never sleep. | |
1873 | </para> | |
1874 | </listitem> | |
1875 | </itemizedlist> | |
1876 | </sect1> | |
1877 | ||
1878 | <sect1 id="dont-sleep"> | |
1879 | <title>Some Functions Which Don't Sleep</title> | |
1880 | ||
1881 | <para> | |
1882 | Some functions are safe to call from any context, or holding | |
1883 | almost any lock. | |
1884 | </para> | |
1885 | ||
1886 | <itemizedlist> | |
1887 | <listitem> | |
1888 | <para> | |
1889 | <function>printk()</function> | |
1890 | </para> | |
1891 | </listitem> | |
1892 | <listitem> | |
1893 | <para> | |
1894 | <function>kfree()</function> | |
1895 | </para> | |
1896 | </listitem> | |
1897 | <listitem> | |
1898 | <para> | |
1899 | <function>add_timer()</function> and <function>del_timer()</function> | |
1900 | </para> | |
1901 | </listitem> | |
1902 | </itemizedlist> | |
1903 | </sect1> | |
1904 | </chapter> | |
1905 | ||
1906 | <chapter id="references"> | |
1907 | <title>Further reading</title> | |
1908 | ||
1909 | <itemizedlist> | |
1910 | <listitem> | |
1911 | <para> | |
1912 | <filename>Documentation/spinlocks.txt</filename>: | |
1913 | Linus Torvalds' spinlocking tutorial in the kernel sources. | |
1914 | </para> | |
1915 | </listitem> | |
1916 | ||
1917 | <listitem> | |
1918 | <para> | |
1919 | Unix Systems for Modern Architectures: Symmetric | |
1920 | Multiprocessing and Caching for Kernel Programmers: | |
1921 | </para> | |
1922 | ||
1923 | <para> | |
1924 | Curt Schimmel's very good introduction to kernel level | |
1925 | locking (not written for Linux, but nearly everything | |
1926 | applies). The book is expensive, but really worth every | |
1927 | penny to understand SMP locking. [ISBN: 0201633388] | |
1928 | </para> | |
1929 | </listitem> | |
1930 | </itemizedlist> | |
1931 | </chapter> | |
1932 | ||
1933 | <chapter id="thanks"> | |
1934 | <title>Thanks</title> | |
1935 | ||
1936 | <para> | |
1937 | Thanks to Telsa Gwynne for DocBooking, neatening and adding | |
1938 | style. | |
1939 | </para> | |
1940 | ||
1941 | <para> | |
1942 | Thanks to Martin Pool, Philipp Rumpf, Stephen Rothwell, Paul | |
1943 | Mackerras, Ruedi Aschwanden, Alan Cox, Manfred Spraul, Tim | |
1944 | Waugh, Pete Zaitcev, James Morris, Robert Love, Paul McKenney, | |
1945 | John Ashby for proofreading, correcting, flaming, commenting. | |
1946 | </para> | |
1947 | ||
1948 | <para> | |
1949 | Thanks to the cabal for having no influence on this document. | |
1950 | </para> | |
1951 | </chapter> | |
1952 | ||
1953 | <glossary id="glossary"> | |
1954 | <title>Glossary</title> | |
1955 | ||
1956 | <glossentry id="gloss-preemption"> | |
1957 | <glossterm>preemption</glossterm> | |
1958 | <glossdef> | |
1959 | <para> | |
1960 | Prior to 2.5, or when <symbol>CONFIG_PREEMPT</symbol> is | |
1961 | unset, processes in user context inside the kernel would not | |
1962 | preempt each other (ie. you had that CPU until you have it up, | |
1963 | except for interrupts). With the addition of | |
1964 | <symbol>CONFIG_PREEMPT</symbol> in 2.5.4, this changed: when | |
1965 | in user context, higher priority tasks can "cut in": spinlocks | |
1966 | were changed to disable preemption, even on UP. | |
1967 | </para> | |
1968 | </glossdef> | |
1969 | </glossentry> | |
1970 | ||
1971 | <glossentry id="gloss-bh"> | |
1972 | <glossterm>bh</glossterm> | |
1973 | <glossdef> | |
1974 | <para> | |
1975 | Bottom Half: for historical reasons, functions with | |
1976 | '_bh' in them often now refer to any software interrupt, e.g. | |
1977 | <function>spin_lock_bh()</function> blocks any software interrupt | |
1978 | on the current CPU. Bottom halves are deprecated, and will | |
1979 | eventually be replaced by tasklets. Only one bottom half will be | |
1980 | running at any time. | |
1981 | </para> | |
1982 | </glossdef> | |
1983 | </glossentry> | |
1984 | ||
1985 | <glossentry id="gloss-hwinterrupt"> | |
1986 | <glossterm>Hardware Interrupt / Hardware IRQ</glossterm> | |
1987 | <glossdef> | |
1988 | <para> | |
1989 | Hardware interrupt request. <function>in_irq()</function> returns | |
1990 | <returnvalue>true</returnvalue> in a hardware interrupt handler. | |
1991 | </para> | |
1992 | </glossdef> | |
1993 | </glossentry> | |
1994 | ||
1995 | <glossentry id="gloss-interruptcontext"> | |
1996 | <glossterm>Interrupt Context</glossterm> | |
1997 | <glossdef> | |
1998 | <para> | |
1999 | Not user context: processing a hardware irq or software irq. | |
2000 | Indicated by the <function>in_interrupt()</function> macro | |
2001 | returning <returnvalue>true</returnvalue>. | |
2002 | </para> | |
2003 | </glossdef> | |
2004 | </glossentry> | |
2005 | ||
2006 | <glossentry id="gloss-smp"> | |
2007 | <glossterm><acronym>SMP</acronym></glossterm> | |
2008 | <glossdef> | |
2009 | <para> | |
2010 | Symmetric Multi-Processor: kernels compiled for multiple-CPU | |
2011 | machines. (CONFIG_SMP=y). | |
2012 | </para> | |
2013 | </glossdef> | |
2014 | </glossentry> | |
2015 | ||
2016 | <glossentry id="gloss-softirq"> | |
2017 | <glossterm>Software Interrupt / softirq</glossterm> | |
2018 | <glossdef> | |
2019 | <para> | |
2020 | Software interrupt handler. <function>in_irq()</function> returns | |
2021 | <returnvalue>false</returnvalue>; <function>in_softirq()</function> | |
2022 | returns <returnvalue>true</returnvalue>. Tasklets and softirqs | |
2023 | both fall into the category of 'software interrupts'. | |
2024 | </para> | |
2025 | <para> | |
2026 | Strictly speaking a softirq is one of up to 32 enumerated software | |
2027 | interrupts which can run on multiple CPUs at once. | |
2028 | Sometimes used to refer to tasklets as | |
2029 | well (ie. all software interrupts). | |
2030 | </para> | |
2031 | </glossdef> | |
2032 | </glossentry> | |
2033 | ||
2034 | <glossentry id="gloss-tasklet"> | |
2035 | <glossterm>tasklet</glossterm> | |
2036 | <glossdef> | |
2037 | <para> | |
2038 | A dynamically-registrable software interrupt, | |
2039 | which is guaranteed to only run on one CPU at a time. | |
2040 | </para> | |
2041 | </glossdef> | |
2042 | </glossentry> | |
2043 | ||
2044 | <glossentry id="gloss-timers"> | |
2045 | <glossterm>timer</glossterm> | |
2046 | <glossdef> | |
2047 | <para> | |
2048 | A dynamically-registrable software interrupt, which is run at | |
2049 | (or close to) a given time. When running, it is just like a | |
2050 | tasklet (in fact, they are called from the TIMER_SOFTIRQ). | |
2051 | </para> | |
2052 | </glossdef> | |
2053 | </glossentry> | |
2054 | ||
2055 | <glossentry id="gloss-up"> | |
2056 | <glossterm><acronym>UP</acronym></glossterm> | |
2057 | <glossdef> | |
2058 | <para> | |
2059 | Uni-Processor: Non-SMP. (CONFIG_SMP=n). | |
2060 | </para> | |
2061 | </glossdef> | |
2062 | </glossentry> | |
2063 | ||
2064 | <glossentry id="gloss-usercontext"> | |
2065 | <glossterm>User Context</glossterm> | |
2066 | <glossdef> | |
2067 | <para> | |
2068 | The kernel executing on behalf of a particular process (ie. a | |
2069 | system call or trap) or kernel thread. You can tell which | |
2070 | process with the <symbol>current</symbol> macro.) Not to | |
2071 | be confused with userspace. Can be interrupted by software or | |
2072 | hardware interrupts. | |
2073 | </para> | |
2074 | </glossdef> | |
2075 | </glossentry> | |
2076 | ||
2077 | <glossentry id="gloss-userspace"> | |
2078 | <glossterm>Userspace</glossterm> | |
2079 | <glossdef> | |
2080 | <para> | |
2081 | A process executing its own code outside the kernel. | |
2082 | </para> | |
2083 | </glossdef> | |
2084 | </glossentry> | |
2085 | ||
2086 | </glossary> | |
2087 | </book> | |
2088 |