| .. _array_rcu_doc: |
| |
| Using RCU to Protect Read-Mostly Arrays |
| ======================================= |
| |
| Although RCU is more commonly used to protect linked lists, it can |
| also be used to protect arrays. Three situations are as follows: |
| |
| 1. :ref:`Hash Tables <hash_tables>` |
| |
| 2. :ref:`Static Arrays <static_arrays>` |
| |
| 3. :ref:`Resizable Arrays <resizable_arrays>` |
| |
| Each of these three situations involves an RCU-protected pointer to an |
| array that is separately indexed. It might be tempting to consider use |
| of RCU to instead protect the index into an array, however, this use |
| case is **not** supported. The problem with RCU-protected indexes into |
| arrays is that compilers can play way too many optimization games with |
| integers, which means that the rules governing handling of these indexes |
| are far more trouble than they are worth. If RCU-protected indexes into |
| arrays prove to be particularly valuable (which they have not thus far), |
| explicit cooperation from the compiler will be required to permit them |
| to be safely used. |
| |
| That aside, each of the three RCU-protected pointer situations are |
| described in the following sections. |
| |
| .. _hash_tables: |
| |
| Situation 1: Hash Tables |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| Hash tables are often implemented as an array, where each array entry |
| has a linked-list hash chain. Each hash chain can be protected by RCU |
| as described in listRCU.rst. This approach also applies to other |
| array-of-list situations, such as radix trees. |
| |
| .. _static_arrays: |
| |
| Situation 2: Static Arrays |
| -------------------------- |
| |
| Static arrays, where the data (rather than a pointer to the data) is |
| located in each array element, and where the array is never resized, |
| have not been used with RCU. Rik van Riel recommends using seqlock in |
| this situation, which would also have minimal read-side overhead as long |
| as updates are rare. |
| |
| Quick Quiz: |
| Why is it so important that updates be rare when using seqlock? |
| |
| :ref:`Answer to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_seqlock>` |
| |
| .. _resizable_arrays: |
| |
| Situation 3: Resizable Arrays |
| ------------------------------ |
| |
| Use of RCU for resizable arrays is demonstrated by the grow_ary() |
| function formerly used by the System V IPC code. The array is used |
| to map from semaphore, message-queue, and shared-memory IDs to the data |
| structure that represents the corresponding IPC construct. The grow_ary() |
| function does not acquire any locks; instead its caller must hold the |
| ids->sem semaphore. |
| |
| The grow_ary() function, shown below, does some limit checks, allocates a |
| new ipc_id_ary, copies the old to the new portion of the new, initializes |
| the remainder of the new, updates the ids->entries pointer to point to |
| the new array, and invokes ipc_rcu_putref() to free up the old array. |
| Note that rcu_assign_pointer() is used to update the ids->entries pointer, |
| which includes any memory barriers required on whatever architecture |
| you are running on:: |
| |
| static int grow_ary(struct ipc_ids* ids, int newsize) |
| { |
| struct ipc_id_ary* new; |
| struct ipc_id_ary* old; |
| int i; |
| int size = ids->entries->size; |
| |
| if(newsize > IPCMNI) |
| newsize = IPCMNI; |
| if(newsize <= size) |
| return newsize; |
| |
| new = ipc_rcu_alloc(sizeof(struct kern_ipc_perm *)*newsize + |
| sizeof(struct ipc_id_ary)); |
| if(new == NULL) |
| return size; |
| new->size = newsize; |
| memcpy(new->p, ids->entries->p, |
| sizeof(struct kern_ipc_perm *)*size + |
| sizeof(struct ipc_id_ary)); |
| for(i=size;i<newsize;i++) { |
| new->p[i] = NULL; |
| } |
| old = ids->entries; |
| |
| /* |
| * Use rcu_assign_pointer() to make sure the memcpyed |
| * contents of the new array are visible before the new |
| * array becomes visible. |
| */ |
| rcu_assign_pointer(ids->entries, new); |
| |
| ipc_rcu_putref(old); |
| return newsize; |
| } |
| |
| The ipc_rcu_putref() function decrements the array's reference count |
| and then, if the reference count has dropped to zero, uses call_rcu() |
| to free the array after a grace period has elapsed. |
| |
| The array is traversed by the ipc_lock() function. This function |
| indexes into the array under the protection of rcu_read_lock(), |
| using rcu_dereference() to pick up the pointer to the array so |
| that it may later safely be dereferenced -- memory barriers are |
| required on the Alpha CPU. Since the size of the array is stored |
| with the array itself, there can be no array-size mismatches, so |
| a simple check suffices. The pointer to the structure corresponding |
| to the desired IPC object is placed in "out", with NULL indicating |
| a non-existent entry. After acquiring "out->lock", the "out->deleted" |
| flag indicates whether the IPC object is in the process of being |
| deleted, and, if not, the pointer is returned:: |
| |
| struct kern_ipc_perm* ipc_lock(struct ipc_ids* ids, int id) |
| { |
| struct kern_ipc_perm* out; |
| int lid = id % SEQ_MULTIPLIER; |
| struct ipc_id_ary* entries; |
| |
| rcu_read_lock(); |
| entries = rcu_dereference(ids->entries); |
| if(lid >= entries->size) { |
| rcu_read_unlock(); |
| return NULL; |
| } |
| out = entries->p[lid]; |
| if(out == NULL) { |
| rcu_read_unlock(); |
| return NULL; |
| } |
| spin_lock(&out->lock); |
| |
| /* ipc_rmid() may have already freed the ID while ipc_lock |
| * was spinning: here verify that the structure is still valid |
| */ |
| if (out->deleted) { |
| spin_unlock(&out->lock); |
| rcu_read_unlock(); |
| return NULL; |
| } |
| return out; |
| } |
| |
| .. _answer_quick_quiz_seqlock: |
| |
| Answer to Quick Quiz: |
| Why is it so important that updates be rare when using seqlock? |
| |
| The reason that it is important that updates be rare when |
| using seqlock is that frequent updates can livelock readers. |
| One way to avoid this problem is to assign a seqlock for |
| each array entry rather than to the entire array. |