Re: [PATCH 2/2] hazptr: Introduce CONFIG_HAZPTR_DEBUG misuse detection

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

On 2026-07-10 15:07, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > We should really rename this given that it detaches the hazptr ctx from
> > the execution _context_ (irq handler or thread). Not sure how to name it
> > though.
>
> hazptr_detach_from_context()?
>
> I am leaving this alone for the moment, easy to change later.

I just wonder if that name brings confusion. Is "context" the
execution context or the "hazptr ctx" context ? I fear this is
really a good opportunity to confuse everyone.

[...]

> > Maybe just call it hazptr_detach() ?
>
> That would be your choice, not mine.  ;-)

I find that hazptr_detach is probably better here. It does not
state it detaches "what", but at least there is no shortcut
confusion with the overloaded "context" wording.

[...]

>   
> +/**
> + * hazptr_detach_from_task - Allow a hazard pointer to be released by some other task
> + *
> + * @ctx: The hazard-pointer context to be migrated.
> + *
> + * By default, a given hazptr_acquire() and the corresponding
> + * hazptr_release() must run in a single execution context, for example,
> + * the context of a single task or a single interrupt handler.  When you
> + * have acquired a hazard pointer in one context and need to release it
> + * in another, you must invoke hazptr_detach_from_task() on that hazard
> + * pointer's context.  It is permissible to invoke hazptr_detach_from_task()
> + * multiple times on the same @ctx while it is protecting the same pointer,
> + * however, the first invocation absolutely must be in the same context
> + * that did the hazptr_acquire(), and must take place after the return
> + * from that hazptr_acquire().
> + *
> + * For example, if a hazard pointer is acquired by a task and
> + * released by a timer handler, that task would need to pass the hazard
> + * pointer's context to hazptr_detach_from_task() after return from the
> + * hazptr_acquire() and before arming the timer (or at least before the
> + * handler had a chance to access that hazard-pointer context).

good.

> + */
>   static inline
>   void hazptr_detach_from_task(struct hazptr_ctx *ctx)
>   {
> @@ -160,12 +182,26 @@ void hazptr_note_context_switch(void)
>   	}
>   }
>   
> -/*
> - * hazptr_acquire: Load pointer at address and protect with hazard pointer.
> +/**
> + * hazptr_acquire - Load pointer at address and protect with hazard pointer.
> + *
> + * @ctx: The hazard-pointer context to be passed to hazptr_release().
> + * @addr_p: Pointer to the pointer that is to be hazard-pointer protected.
>    *
>    * Load @addr_p, and protect the loaded pointer with hazard pointer.
> - * When using hazptr_acquire from interrupt handlers, the acquired slots
> - * need to be released before returning from the interrupt handler.
> + * This protection is roughly similar to that of a reference counter, and
> + * ends with a later call to hazptr_release().

Perhaps worthwhile to hint at the vast performance/scalability/memory
footprint/cache line footprint difference between hazptr and refcount
to justify why both exist here ?

AFAIU there is partial overlap between refcount, hazptr, and RCU, each
with their own strengths and weaknesses. We should prepare a summary
table for the end users wondering which is the right tool for their
use-case.

> + *
> + * By default, the call to hazptr_release() must be running in the same
> + * execution context as the corresponding hazptr_acquire(), for example,
> + * within the same task or interrupt handler.  When it is necessary
> + * to instead call hazptr_release() from some other context, pass @ctx
> + * to hazptr_detach_from_task() in the original context after invoking
> + * hazptr_acquire() but before making the hazard pointer available to that
> + * other context.
> + *
> + * It is not permissible to invoke hazptr_acquire() twice on the same @ctx
> + * without an intervening hazptr_release().

good

>    *
>    * Returns a non-NULL protected address if the loaded pointer is non-NULL.
>    * Returns NULL if the loaded pointer is NULL.
> @@ -233,7 +269,23 @@ void hazptr_release_debug(struct hazptr_ctx *ctx, void *addr)
>   static inline void hazptr_release_debug(struct hazptr_ctx *ctx, void *addr) { }
>   #endif
>   
> -/* Release the protected hazard pointer from @slot. */
> +/**
> + * hazptr_release - Release the specified hazard pointer
> + *
> + * @ctx: The hazard-pointer context that was passed to hazptr_acquire().
> + * @addr_p: The pointer that is to be hazard-pointer unprotected.
> + *
> + * Release the protected hazard pointer recorded in @ctx.
> + *
> + * By default, hazptr_release() must execute in the same execution context
> + * that invoked the corresponding hazptr_acquire(), for example, within the
> + * same task or the same interrupt handler.  However, if this restriction
> + * is problematic for your use case, please see hazptr_detach_from_task().
> + *
> + * It is permissible (though unwise from a maintainability viewpoint)
> + * to invoke hazptr_release() twice on the same @ctx without an intervening
> + * hazptr_acquire().

Good!

Thanks,

Mathieu

> + */
>   static inline
>   void hazptr_release(struct hazptr_ctx *ctx, void *addr)
>   {


--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com