Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 10:17:38 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Lockless uidinfo. Message-ID: <20070818171738.GB90381@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20070818161449.GE6498@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20070818120056.GA6498@garage.freebsd.pl> <20070818142337.GW90381@elvis.mu.org> <20070818150028.GD6498@garage.freebsd.pl> <20070818155041.GY90381@elvis.mu.org> <20070818161449.GE6498@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> [070818 09:14] wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 08:50:41AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > * Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> [070818 07:59] wrote:
> > > Yes, to lookup uidinfo you need to hold uihashtbl_mtx mutex, so once you
> > > hold it and ui_ref is 0, noone will be able to reference it, because it
> > > has to wait to look it up.
> >
> > And the field doesn't need to be volatile to prevent cached/opportunitic
> > reads?
>
> The only chance of something like this will be the scenario below:
>
> thread1 (uifind) thread2 (uifree)
> ---------------- ----------------
> refcount_release(&uip->ui_ref))
> /* ui_ref == 0 */
> mtx_lock(&uihashtbl_mtx);
> refcount_acquire(&uip->ui_ref);
> /* ui_ref == 1 */
> mtx_unlock(&uihashtbl_mtx);
> mtx_lock(&uihashtbl_mtx);
> if (uip->ui_ref > 0) {
> mtx_unlock(&uihashtbl_mtx);
> return;
> }
>
> Now, you suggest that ui_ref in 'if (uip->ui_ref > 0)' may still have
> cached 0? I don't think it is possible, first refcount_acquire() uses
> read memory bariers (but we may still need ui_ref to volatile for this
> to make any difference) and second, think of ui_ref as a field protected
> by uihashtbl_mtx mutex in this very case.
>
> Is my thinking correct?
I don't know, that's why I was asking you. :)
--
- Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070818171738.GB90381>