From: compudj@krystal.dyndns.org (Mathieu Desnoyers)
Subject: [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 1/4] Provide pthread_atfork-friendly interfaces
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:21:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP72AEB7B7D5D738CC54CA4896AA0@phx.gbl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1302666735-26723-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
* Paul E. McKenney (paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> Provides call_rcu_before_fork() and call_rcu_after_fork_parent() to
> go with the existing call_rcu_after_fork_child().
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> README | 4 ++++
> urcu-call-rcu.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/README b/README
> index f7f0dec..56e98d7 100644
> --- a/README
> +++ b/README
> @@ -204,3 +204,7 @@ Interaction with fork()
> liburcu-bp, which is designed to handle fork() by calling
> rcu_bp_before_fork, rcu_bp_after_fork_parent and
> rcu_bp_after_fork_child.
> +
> + Applications that use call_rcu() are required to invoke
> + call_rcu_after_fork_child() from the child process after a
> + successful fork() system call that is not followed by exec().
Is it possible that we should also mention the before fork and after
fork parent here ? If there is a reason why it is not needed, then we
should state this explicitly, because this is a little surprising.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> diff --git a/urcu-call-rcu.c b/urcu-call-rcu.c
> index bb56dbb..665f20c 100644
> --- a/urcu-call-rcu.c
> +++ b/urcu-call-rcu.c
> @@ -566,13 +566,40 @@ void free_all_cpu_call_rcu_data(void)
> }
>
> /*
> + * Acquire the call_rcu_mutex in order to ensure that the child sees
> + * all of the call_rcu() data structures in a consistent state.
> + * Suitable for pthread_atfork() and friends.
> + */
> +void call_rcu_before_fork(void)
> +{
> + call_rcu_lock(&call_rcu_mutex);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Clean up call_rcu data structures in the parent of a successful fork()
> + * that is not followed by exec() in the child. Suitable for
> + * pthread_atfork() and friends.
> + */
> +void call_rcu_after_fork_parent(void)
> +{
> + call_rcu_unlock(&call_rcu_mutex);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * Clean up call_rcu data structures in the child of a successful fork()
> - * that is not followed by exec().
> + * that is not followed by exec(). Suitable for pthread_atfork() and
> + * friends.
> */
> void call_rcu_after_fork_child(void)
> {
> struct call_rcu_data *crdp;
>
> + /* Re-initialize the mutex. */
> + if (pthread_mutex_init(&call_rcu_mutex, NULL) != 0) {
> + perror("pthread_mutex_init");
> + exit(-1);
> + }
> +
> /*
> * Allocate a new default call_rcu_data structure in order
> * to get a working call_rcu thread to go with it.
> --
> 1.7.3.2
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-13 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-13 3:51 [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 0/2] v2 allow multiple URCU flavors in one executable Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-13 3:52 ` [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 1/4] Provide pthread_atfork-friendly interfaces Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-13 21:21 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2011-04-13 21:26 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-04-13 3:52 ` [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 2/4] Map symbols to allow multiple RCU flavors to be used in one binary Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-13 21:24 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
[not found] ` <BLU0-SMTP10190BBFDDC955B267796E196AA0@phx.gbl>
2011-04-14 0:10 ` [ltt-dev] [rp] " Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-13 3:52 ` [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 3/4] Allow taking address of rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-13 3:52 ` [ltt-dev] [PATCH RFC urcu 4/4] Make defer_rcu() usable from library using multiple URCU implementations Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=BLU0-SMTP72AEB7B7D5D738CC54CA4896AA0@phx.gbl \
--to=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox