[4/5] doc: rcu: Clarify better the rcu_segcblist len field
From: Joel Fernandes (Google)
Date: Tue Sep 25 2018 - 14:26:37 EST
An important note under the rcu_segcblist description could use a
more detailed description. Especially explanation of the scenario
where the ->head field may be temporarily NULL making it not wise to
rely on it to determine if callbacks are associated with the
rcu_segcblist. Thanks Paul for clarifying over email.
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
.../RCU/Design/Data-Structures/Data-Structures.html | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Data-Structures/Data-Structures.html b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Data-Structures/Data-Structures.html
index 3f9a8ae4287e..a45fc326d990 100644
@@ -928,10 +928,16 @@ this <tt>rcu_segcblist</tt> structure, <i>not</i> the <tt>->head</tt>
The reason for this is that all the ready-to-invoke callbacks
(that is, those in the <tt>RCU_DONE_TAIL</tt> segment) are extracted
-all at once at callback-invocation time.
+all at once at callback-invocation time (<tt>rcu_do_batch</tt>), due
+to which <tt>->head</tt> may be set to NULL if there are no more
+callbacks on the <tt>rcu_segcblist</tt>.
If callback invocation must be postponed, for example, because a
high-priority process just woke up on this CPU, then the remaining
-callbacks are placed back on the <tt>RCU_DONE_TAIL</tt> segment.
+callbacks are placed back on the <tt>RCU_DONE_TAIL</tt> segment and
+<tt>->head</tt> would point to the start of the segment. So as you
+can see, the head field is briefly NULL even though not all callbacks
+could be invoked, so we can't rely on it to tell us if there are no
+callbacks associated with the <tt>rcu_segcb_list</tt>.
Either way, the <tt>->len</tt> and <tt>->len_lazy</tt> counts
are adjusted after the corresponding callbacks have been invoked, and so
again it is the <tt>->len</tt> count that accurately reflects whether