linux-stable/lib/llist.c

93 lines
2.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
/*
* Lock-less NULL terminated single linked list
*
* The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On
* architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the
* list can NOT be used in NMI handlers. So code that uses the list in
* an NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG.
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
*
* Copyright 2010,2011 Intel Corp.
* Author: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
*/
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/export.h>
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
#include <linux/llist.h>
/**
* llist_add_batch - add several linked entries in batch
* @new_first: first entry in batch to be added
* @new_last: last entry in batch to be added
* @head: the head for your lock-less list
*
* Return whether list is empty before adding.
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
*/
bool llist_add_batch(struct llist_node *new_first, struct llist_node *new_last,
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
struct llist_head *head)
{
struct llist_node *first;
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
do {
locking/atomics: COCCINELLE/treewide: Convert trivial ACCESS_ONCE() patterns to READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() Please do not apply this to mainline directly, instead please re-run the coccinelle script shown below and apply its output. For several reasons, it is desirable to use {READ,WRITE}_ONCE() in preference to ACCESS_ONCE(), and new code is expected to use one of the former. So far, there's been no reason to change most existing uses of ACCESS_ONCE(), as these aren't harmful, and changing them results in churn. However, for some features, the read/write distinction is critical to correct operation. To distinguish these cases, separate read/write accessors must be used. This patch migrates (most) remaining ACCESS_ONCE() instances to {READ,WRITE}_ONCE(), using the following coccinelle script: ---- // Convert trivial ACCESS_ONCE() uses to equivalent READ_ONCE() and // WRITE_ONCE() // $ make coccicheck COCCI=/home/mark/once.cocci SPFLAGS="--include-headers" MODE=patch virtual patch @ depends on patch @ expression E1, E2; @@ - ACCESS_ONCE(E1) = E2 + WRITE_ONCE(E1, E2) @ depends on patch @ expression E; @@ - ACCESS_ONCE(E) + READ_ONCE(E) ---- Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: davem@davemloft.net Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au Cc: shuah@kernel.org Cc: snitzer@redhat.com Cc: thor.thayer@linux.intel.com Cc: tj@kernel.org Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Cc: will.deacon@arm.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1508792849-3115-19-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-10-23 21:07:29 +00:00
new_last->next = first = READ_ONCE(head->first);
} while (cmpxchg(&head->first, first, new_first) != first);
return !first;
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(llist_add_batch);
/**
* llist_del_first - delete the first entry of lock-less list
* @head: the head for your lock-less list
*
* If list is empty, return NULL, otherwise, return the first entry
* deleted, this is the newest added one.
*
* Only one llist_del_first user can be used simultaneously with
* multiple llist_add users without lock. Because otherwise
* llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add,
* llist_add) sequence in another user may change @head->first->next,
* but keep @head->first. If multiple consumers are needed, please
* use llist_del_all or use lock between consumers.
*/
struct llist_node *llist_del_first(struct llist_head *head)
{
struct llist_node *entry, *old_entry, *next;
lib/llist.c: fix data race in llist_del_first llist_del_first reads entry->next, but it did not acquire visibility over the entry node. As the result it can get a stale value of entry->next (e.g. NULL or whatever garbage was there before the appending thread wrote correct value). And then commit that value as llist head with cmpxchg. That will corrupt llist. Note there is a control-dependency between read of head->first and read of entry->next, but it does not make the code correct. Kernel memory model unambiguously says: "A load-load control dependency requires a full read memory barrier". Use smp_load_acquire to acquire visibility over the entry node. The data race was found with KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN). Here is an example of KTSAN report: ThreadSanitizer: data-race in llist_del_first Read of size 1 by thread T389 (K2630, CPU0): [<ffffffff8156b8a9>] llist_del_first+0x39/0x70 lib/llist.c:74 [< inlined >] tty_buffer_alloc drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:181 [<ffffffff81664af4>] __tty_buffer_request_room+0xb4/0x250 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:292 [<ffffffff81664e6c>] tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag+0x6c/0x150 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:337 [< inlined >] tty_insert_flip_string include/linux/tty_flip.h:35 [<ffffffff81667422>] pty_write+0x72/0xc0 drivers/tty/pty.c:110 [< inlined >] process_output_block drivers/tty/n_tty.c:611 [<ffffffff8165c016>] n_tty_write+0x346/0x7f0 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2401 [< inlined >] do_tty_write drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1159 [<ffffffff816568df>] tty_write+0x21f/0x3f0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1245 [<ffffffff8125f00f>] __vfs_write+0x5f/0x1f0 fs/read_write.c:489 [<ffffffff8125ff8f>] vfs_write+0xef/0x280 fs/read_write.c:538 [< inlined >] SYSC_write fs/read_write.c:585 [<ffffffff81261390>] SyS_write+0x70/0xe0 fs/read_write.c:577 [<ffffffff81ee862e>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x71 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:186 Previous write of size 8 by thread T226 (K761, CPU0): [<ffffffff8156b832>] llist_add_batch+0x32/0x70 lib/llist.c:44 (discriminator 16) [< inlined >] llist_add include/linux/llist.h:180 [<ffffffff816649fc>] tty_buffer_free+0x6c/0xb0 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:221 [<ffffffff816651e7>] flush_to_ldisc+0x107/0x300 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:514 [<ffffffff810b20ee>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036 [<ffffffff810b2650>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170 [<ffffffff810bbe20>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209 [<ffffffff81ee8a1f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:526 Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Konstantin Serebryany <kcc@google.com> Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-11-07 00:31:17 +00:00
entry = smp_load_acquire(&head->first);
for (;;) {
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
if (entry == NULL)
return NULL;
old_entry = entry;
lib/llist.c: fix data race in llist_del_first llist_del_first reads entry->next, but it did not acquire visibility over the entry node. As the result it can get a stale value of entry->next (e.g. NULL or whatever garbage was there before the appending thread wrote correct value). And then commit that value as llist head with cmpxchg. That will corrupt llist. Note there is a control-dependency between read of head->first and read of entry->next, but it does not make the code correct. Kernel memory model unambiguously says: "A load-load control dependency requires a full read memory barrier". Use smp_load_acquire to acquire visibility over the entry node. The data race was found with KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN). Here is an example of KTSAN report: ThreadSanitizer: data-race in llist_del_first Read of size 1 by thread T389 (K2630, CPU0): [<ffffffff8156b8a9>] llist_del_first+0x39/0x70 lib/llist.c:74 [< inlined >] tty_buffer_alloc drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:181 [<ffffffff81664af4>] __tty_buffer_request_room+0xb4/0x250 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:292 [<ffffffff81664e6c>] tty_insert_flip_string_fixed_flag+0x6c/0x150 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:337 [< inlined >] tty_insert_flip_string include/linux/tty_flip.h:35 [<ffffffff81667422>] pty_write+0x72/0xc0 drivers/tty/pty.c:110 [< inlined >] process_output_block drivers/tty/n_tty.c:611 [<ffffffff8165c016>] n_tty_write+0x346/0x7f0 drivers/tty/n_tty.c:2401 [< inlined >] do_tty_write drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1159 [<ffffffff816568df>] tty_write+0x21f/0x3f0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1245 [<ffffffff8125f00f>] __vfs_write+0x5f/0x1f0 fs/read_write.c:489 [<ffffffff8125ff8f>] vfs_write+0xef/0x280 fs/read_write.c:538 [< inlined >] SYSC_write fs/read_write.c:585 [<ffffffff81261390>] SyS_write+0x70/0xe0 fs/read_write.c:577 [<ffffffff81ee862e>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x71 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:186 Previous write of size 8 by thread T226 (K761, CPU0): [<ffffffff8156b832>] llist_add_batch+0x32/0x70 lib/llist.c:44 (discriminator 16) [< inlined >] llist_add include/linux/llist.h:180 [<ffffffff816649fc>] tty_buffer_free+0x6c/0xb0 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:221 [<ffffffff816651e7>] flush_to_ldisc+0x107/0x300 drivers/tty/tty_buffer.c:514 [<ffffffff810b20ee>] process_one_work+0x47e/0x930 kernel/workqueue.c:2036 [<ffffffff810b2650>] worker_thread+0xb0/0x900 kernel/workqueue.c:2170 [<ffffffff810bbe20>] kthread+0x150/0x170 kernel/kthread.c:209 [<ffffffff81ee8a1f>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:526 Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Konstantin Serebryany <kcc@google.com> Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-11-07 00:31:17 +00:00
next = READ_ONCE(entry->next);
entry = cmpxchg(&head->first, old_entry, next);
if (entry == old_entry)
break;
}
lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list Cmpxchg is used to implement adding new entry to the list, deleting all entries from the list, deleting first entry of the list and some other operations. Because this is a single list, so the tail can not be accessed in O(1). If there are multiple producers and multiple consumers, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all can be used in consumers. They can work simultaneously without lock. But llist_del_first can not be used here. Because llist_del_first depends on list->first->next does not changed if list->first is not changed during its operation, but llist_del_first, llist_add, llist_add (or llist_del_all, llist_add, llist_add) sequence in another consumer may violate that. If there are multiple producers and one consumer, llist_add can be used in producers and llist_del_all or llist_del_first can be used in the consumer. This can be summarized as follow: | add | del_first | del_all add | - | - | - del_first | | L | L del_all | | | - Where "-" stands for no lock is needed, while "L" stands for lock is needed. The list entries deleted via llist_del_all can be traversed with traversing function such as llist_for_each etc. But the list entries can not be traversed safely before deleted from the list. The order of deleted entries is from the newest to the oldest added one. If you want to traverse from the oldest to the newest, you must reverse the order by yourself before traversing. The basic atomic operation of this list is cmpxchg on long. On architectures that don't have NMI-safe cmpxchg implementation, the list can NOT be used in NMI handler. So code uses the list in NMI handler should depend on CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG. Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
2011-07-13 05:14:23 +00:00
return entry;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(llist_del_first);
/**
* llist_reverse_order - reverse order of a llist chain
* @head: first item of the list to be reversed
*
* Reverse the order of a chain of llist entries and return the
* new first entry.
*/
struct llist_node *llist_reverse_order(struct llist_node *head)
{
struct llist_node *new_head = NULL;
while (head) {
struct llist_node *tmp = head;
head = head->next;
tmp->next = new_head;
new_head = tmp;
}
return new_head;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(llist_reverse_order);