On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:26:16PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Apr 7, 2019, at 9:59 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > [ . . . ] > > > >> > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h > >> > > b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h > >> > > index f8f6f04c4453..c2d919a1566e 100644 > >> > > --- a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h > >> > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h > >> > > @@ -338,6 +338,10 @@ > >> > > KEEP(*(__tracepoints_ptrs)) /* Tracepoints: pointer > >> > > array */ \ > >> > > __stop___tracepoints_ptrs = .; > >> > > \ > >> > > *(__tracepoints_strings)/* Tracepoints: strings */ > >> > > \ > >> > > + . = ALIGN(8); > >> > > \ > >> > > + __start___srcu_struct = .; > >> > > \ > >> > > + *(___srcu_struct_ptrs) > >> > > \ > >> > > + __end___srcu_struct = .; > >> > > \ > >> > > } > >> > > \ > >> > > >> > This vmlinux linker modification is not needed. I tested without it and > >> > srcu > >> > torture works fine with rcutorture built as a module. Putting further > >> > prints > >> > in kernel/module.c verified that the kernel is able to find the srcu > >> > structs > >> > just fine. You could squash the below patch into this one or apply it on > >> > top > >> > of the dev branch. > >> > >> Good point, given that otherwise FORTRAN named common blocks would not > >> work. > >> > >> But isn't one advantage of leaving that stuff in the RO_DATA_SECTION() > >> macro that it can be mapped read-only? Or am I suffering from excessive > >> optimism? > > > > And to answer the other question, in the case where I am suffering from > > excessive optimism, it should be a separate commit. Please see below > > for the updated original commit thus far. > > > > And may I have your Tested-by? > > Just to confirm: does the cleanup performed in the modules going > notifier end up acting as a barrier first before freeing the memory ? > If not, is it explicitly stated that a barrier must be issued before > module unload ? >
You mean rcu_barrier? It is mentioned in the documentation that this is the responsibility of the module writer to prevent delays for all modules. thanks. > Thanks, > > Mathieu > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
