Merge branch 'rcu/next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu into core/rcu

Pull the v3.5 RCU tree from Paul E. McKenney:

 1)	A set of improvements and fixes to the RCU_FAST_NO_HZ feature
	(with more on the way for 3.6).  Posted to LKML:
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/23/324 (commits 1-3 and 5),
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/16/611 (commit 4),
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/30/390 (commit 6), and
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/5/4/410 (commit 7, combined with
	the other commits for the convenience of the tester).

 2)	Changes to make rcu_barrier() avoid disrupting execution of CPUs
	that have no RCU callbacks.  Posted to LKML:
	https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/23/322.

 3)	A couple of commits that improve the efficiency of the interaction
	between preemptible RCU and the scheduler, these two being all
	that survived an abortive attempt to allow preemptible RCU's
	__rcu_read_lock() to be inlined.  The full set was posted to
	LKML at https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/14/143, and the first and
	third patches of that set remain.

 4)	Lai Jiangshan's algorithmic implementation of SRCU, which includes
	call_srcu() and srcu_barrier().  A major feature of this new
	implementation is that synchronize_srcu() no longer disturbs
	the execution of other CPUs.  This work is based on earlier
	implementations by Peter Zijlstra and Paul E. McKenney.  Posted to
	LKML: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/22/82.

 5)	A number of miscellaneous bug fixes and improvements which were
	posted to LKML at: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/4/23/353 with
	subsequent updates posted to LKML.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 35 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/rculist.h b/include/linux/rculist.h
index d079290..e0f0fab 100644
--- a/include/linux/rculist.h
+++ b/include/linux/rculist.h
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
  * This is only for internal list manipulation where we know
  * the prev/next entries already!
  */
+#ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST
 static inline void __list_add_rcu(struct list_head *new,
 		struct list_head *prev, struct list_head *next)
 {
@@ -38,6 +39,10 @@ static inline void __list_add_rcu(struct list_head *new,
 	rcu_assign_pointer(list_next_rcu(prev), new);
 	next->prev = new;
 }
+#else
+extern void __list_add_rcu(struct list_head *new,
+		struct list_head *prev, struct list_head *next);
+#endif
 
 /**
  * list_add_rcu - add a new entry to rcu-protected list
@@ -108,7 +113,7 @@ static inline void list_add_tail_rcu(struct list_head *new,
  */
 static inline void list_del_rcu(struct list_head *entry)
 {
-	__list_del(entry->prev, entry->next);
+	__list_del_entry(entry);
 	entry->prev = LIST_POISON2;
 }
 
@@ -228,18 +233,43 @@ static inline void list_splice_init_rcu(struct list_head *list,
 	})
 
 /**
- * list_first_entry_rcu - get the first element from a list
+ * Where are list_empty_rcu() and list_first_entry_rcu()?
+ *
+ * Implementing those functions following their counterparts list_empty() and
+ * list_first_entry() is not advisable because they lead to subtle race
+ * conditions as the following snippet shows:
+ *
+ * if (!list_empty_rcu(mylist)) {
+ *	struct foo *bar = list_first_entry_rcu(mylist, struct foo, list_member);
+ *	do_something(bar);
+ * }
+ *
+ * The list may not be empty when list_empty_rcu checks it, but it may be when
+ * list_first_entry_rcu rereads the ->next pointer.
+ *
+ * Rereading the ->next pointer is not a problem for list_empty() and
+ * list_first_entry() because they would be protected by a lock that blocks
+ * writers.
+ *
+ * See list_first_or_null_rcu for an alternative.
+ */
+
+/**
+ * list_first_or_null_rcu - get the first element from a list
  * @ptr:        the list head to take the element from.
  * @type:       the type of the struct this is embedded in.
  * @member:     the name of the list_struct within the struct.
  *
- * Note, that list is expected to be not empty.
+ * Note that if the list is empty, it returns NULL.
  *
  * This primitive may safely run concurrently with the _rcu list-mutation
  * primitives such as list_add_rcu() as long as it's guarded by rcu_read_lock().
  */
-#define list_first_entry_rcu(ptr, type, member) \
-	list_entry_rcu((ptr)->next, type, member)
+#define list_first_or_null_rcu(ptr, type, member) \
+	({struct list_head *__ptr = (ptr); \
+	  struct list_head __rcu *__next = list_next_rcu(__ptr); \
+	  likely(__ptr != __next) ? container_of(__next, type, member) : NULL; \
+	})
 
 /**
  * list_for_each_entry_rcu	-	iterate over rcu list of given type