Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] rust: lock: add `Guard::do_unlocked`
From: Wedson Almeida Filho
Date: Wed Apr 12 2023 - 07:10:49 EST
On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 at 18:18, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 02:45:41AM -0300, Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> > From: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > It releases the lock, executes some function provided by the caller,
> > then reacquires the lock. This is preparation for the implementation of
> > condvars, which will sleep after between unlocking and relocking.
> >
> > We need an explicit `relock` method for primitives like `SpinLock` that
> > have an irqsave variant: we use the guard state to determine if the lock
> > was originally acquired with the regular `lock` function or
> > `lock_irqsave`.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v1 -> v2: No changes
> > v2 -> v3: No changes
> > v3 -> v4: No changes
> >
> > rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> > index 819b8ea5ba2b..cde57756795f 100644
> > --- a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> > +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> > @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ pub mod spinlock;
> > ///
> > /// - Implementers must ensure that only one thread/CPU may access the protected data once the lock
> > /// is owned, that is, between calls to `lock` and `unlock`.
> > +/// - Implementers must also ensure that `relock` uses the same locking method as the original
> > +/// lock operation. For example, it should disable interrupts if [`IrqSaveBackend::lock_irqsave`]
> > +/// is used.
> > pub unsafe trait Backend {
> > /// The state required by the lock.
> > type State;
> > @@ -55,6 +58,17 @@ pub unsafe trait Backend {
> > ///
> > /// It must only be called by the current owner of the lock.
> > unsafe fn unlock(ptr: *mut Self::State, guard_state: &Self::GuardState);
> > +
> > + /// Reacquires the lock, making the caller its owner.
> > + ///
> > + /// # Safety
> > + ///
> > + /// Callers must ensure that `state` comes from a previous call to [`Backend::lock`] (or
>
> I think you mean
>
> "Callers must ensure that `guard_state` comes ..."
>
> , right?
That's right, thanks for spotting this!
I renamed the parameter names (based on your feedback :)) but didn't
update the comment accordingly. Will do.
> Regards,
> Boqun
>
> > + /// variant) that has been unlocked with [`Backend::unlock`] and will be relocked now.
> > + unsafe fn relock(ptr: *mut Self::State, guard_state: &mut Self::GuardState) {
> > + // SAFETY: The safety requirements ensure that the lock is initialised.
> > + *guard_state = unsafe { Self::lock(ptr) };
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > /// The "backend" of a lock that supports the irq-save variant.
> > @@ -164,6 +178,17 @@ pub struct Guard<'a, T: ?Sized, B: Backend> {
> > // SAFETY: `Guard` is sync when the data protected by the lock is also sync.
> > unsafe impl<T: Sync + ?Sized, B: Backend> Sync for Guard<'_, T, B> {}
> >
> > +impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> Guard<'_, T, B> {
> > + #[allow(dead_code)]
> > + pub(crate) fn do_unlocked(&mut self, cb: impl FnOnce()) {
> > + // SAFETY: The caller owns the lock, so it is safe to unlock it.
> > + unsafe { B::unlock(self.lock.state.get(), &self.state) };
> > + cb();
> > + // SAFETY: The lock was just unlocked above and is being relocked now.
> > + unsafe { B::relock(self.lock.state.get(), &mut self.state) };
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > impl<T: ?Sized, B: Backend> core::ops::Deref for Guard<'_, T, B> {
> > type Target = T;
> >
> > diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs
> > index 34dec09a97c0..e2a2f68e6d93 100644
> > --- a/rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs
> > +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock/spinlock.rs
> > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > //!
> > //! This module allows Rust code to use the kernel's `spinlock_t`.
> >
> > +use super::IrqSaveBackend;
> > use crate::bindings;
> >
> > /// Creates a [`SpinLock`] initialiser with the given name and a newly-created lock class.
> > @@ -95,7 +96,8 @@ pub type SpinLock<T> = super::Lock<T, SpinLockBackend>;
> > /// A kernel `spinlock_t` lock backend.
> > pub struct SpinLockBackend;
> >
> > -// SAFETY: The underlying kernel `spinlock_t` object ensures mutual exclusion.
> > +// SAFETY: The underlying kernel `spinlock_t` object ensures mutual exclusion. `relock` uses the
> > +// same scheme as `unlock` to figure out which locking method was used originally.
> > unsafe impl super::Backend for SpinLockBackend {
> > type State = bindings::spinlock_t;
> > type GuardState = Option<core::ffi::c_ulong>;
> > @@ -127,13 +129,24 @@ unsafe impl super::Backend for SpinLockBackend {
> > None => unsafe { bindings::spin_unlock(ptr) },
> > }
> > }
> > +
> > + unsafe fn relock(ptr: *mut Self::State, guard_state: &mut Self::GuardState) {
> > + let _ = match guard_state {
> > + // SAFETY: The safety requiments of this function ensure that `ptr` has been
> > + // initialised.
> > + None => unsafe { Self::lock(ptr) },
> > + // SAFETY: The safety requiments of this function ensure that `ptr` has been
> > + // initialised.
> > + Some(_) => unsafe { Self::lock_irqsave(ptr) },
> > + };
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > // SAFETY: The underlying kernel `spinlock_t` object ensures mutual exclusion. We use the `irqsave`
> > // variant of the C lock acquisition functions to disable interrupts and retrieve the original
> > // interrupt state, and the `irqrestore` variant of the lock release functions to restore the state
> > // in `unlock` -- we use the guard context to determine which method was used to acquire the lock.
> > -unsafe impl super::IrqSaveBackend for SpinLockBackend {
> > +unsafe impl IrqSaveBackend for SpinLockBackend {
> > unsafe fn lock_irqsave(ptr: *mut Self::State) -> Self::GuardState {
> > // SAFETY: The safety requirements of this function ensure that `ptr` points to valid
> > // memory, and that it has been initialised before.
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >