Skip to content
Commit d72da4a4 authored by Peter Zijlstra's avatar Peter Zijlstra Committed by Rusty Russell
Browse files

rbtree: Make lockless searches non-fatal



Change the insert and erase code such that lockless searches are
non-fatal.

In and of itself an rbtree cannot be correctly searched while
in-modification, we can however provide weaker guarantees that will
allow the rbtree to be used in conjunction with other techniques, such
as latches; see 9b0fd802 ("seqcount: Add raw_write_seqcount_latch()").

For this to work we need the following guarantees from the rbtree
code:

 1) a lockless reader must not see partial stores, this would allow it
    to observe nodes that are invalid memory.

 2) there must not be (temporary) loops in the tree structure in the
    modifier's program order, this would cause a lookup which
    interrupts the modifier to get stuck indefinitely.

For 1) we must use WRITE_ONCE() for all updates to the tree structure;
in particular this patch only does rb_{left,right} as those are the
only element required for simple searches.

It generates slightly worse code, probably because volatile. But in
pointer chasing heavy code a few instructions more should not matter.

For 2) I have carefully audited the code and drawn every intermediate
link state and not found a loop.

Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMichel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarRusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
parent 0be964be
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment