Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] perf: Helpers for alloc/init/fini PMU specific data
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon Dec 02 2019 - 08:17:04 EST
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 07:14:25AM -0800, kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> +static int
> +__alloc_task_ctx_data_rcu(struct task_struct *task,
> + size_t ctx_size, gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct perf_ctx_data *ctx_data = task->perf_ctx_data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_held_once(&task->perf_ctx_data_lock);
> +
> + ret = alloc_perf_ctx_data(ctx_size, flags, &ctx_data);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ctx_data->refcount = 1;
> +
> + rcu_assign_pointer(task->perf_ctx_data, ctx_data);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +static int
> +__init_task_ctx_data_rcu(struct task_struct *task, size_t ctx_size, gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct perf_ctx_data *ctx_data = task->perf_ctx_data;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_held_once(&task->perf_ctx_data_lock);
> +
> + if (ctx_data) {
> + ctx_data->refcount++;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + return __alloc_task_ctx_data_rcu(task, ctx_size, flags);
> +}
> +/**
> + * Free perf_ctx_data RCU pointer for a task
> + * @task: Target Task
> + * @force: Unconditionally free perf_ctx_data
> + *
> + * If force is set, free perf_ctx_data unconditionally.
> + * Otherwise, free perf_ctx_data when there are no users.
> + * Lock is required to sync the writers of perf_ctx_data RCU pointer
> + * and refcount.
> + */
> +static void
> +fini_task_ctx_data_rcu(struct task_struct *task, bool force)
> +{
> + struct perf_ctx_data *ctx_data;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&task->perf_ctx_data_lock, flags);
> +
> + ctx_data = task->perf_ctx_data;
> + if (!ctx_data)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> + if (!force && --ctx_data->refcount)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(task->perf_ctx_data, NULL);
> + call_rcu(&ctx_data->rcu_head, free_perf_ctx_data);
> +
> +unlock:
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->perf_ctx_data_lock, flags);
> +}
All this refcount under lock is an anti-pattern. Also the naming is
insane.