rcu: Note that rcu_access_pointer() can be used for teardown

There is no convenient expression for rcu_deference_protected()
when it is used in tearing down multilinked structures following
a grace period.  For example, suppose that an element containing an
RCU-protected pointer to a second element is removed from an enclosing
RCU-protected data structure, then the write-side lock is released,
and finally synchronize_rcu() is invoked to wait for a grace period.
Then it is necessary to traverse the pointer in order to free up the
second element.  But we are not in an RCU read-side critical section
and we are holding no locks, so the usual rcu_dereference_check() and
rcu_dereference_protected() primitives are not appropriate.  Neither
is rcu_dereference_raw(), as it is intended for use in data structures
where the user defines the locking design (for example, list_head).

So this responsibility is added to rcu_access_pointer()'s list, and
this commit updates rcu_assign_pointer()'s header comment accordingly.

Suggested-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
Paul E. McKenney 2012-01-12 17:21:20 -08:00
parent 50406b98b6
commit 5e1ee6e101

View File

@ -484,6 +484,13 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
* NULL. Although rcu_access_pointer() may also be used in cases where
* update-side locks prevent the value of the pointer from changing, you
* should instead use rcu_dereference_protected() for this use case.
*
* It is also permissible to use rcu_access_pointer() when read-side
* access to the pointer was removed at least one grace period ago, as
* is the case in the context of the RCU callback that is freeing up
* the data, or after a synchronize_rcu() returns. This can be useful
* when tearing down multi-linked structures after a grace period
* has elapsed.
*/
#define rcu_access_pointer(p) __rcu_access_pointer((p), __rcu)