Commit 4e7ccfae authored by Paul E. McKenney's avatar Paul E. McKenney

srcu: Add comment explaining cookie overflow/wrap

This commit adds to the poll_state_synchronize_srcu() header comment
describing the issues surrounding SRCU cookie overflow/wrap for the
different kernel configurations.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rcu/20201112201547.GF3365678@moria.home.lan/Reported-by: default avatarKent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
parent ee7f4a87
......@@ -1058,6 +1058,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(start_poll_synchronize_srcu);
* get_state_synchronize_srcu() or start_poll_synchronize_srcu(), and
* returns @true if an SRCU grace period elapsed since the time that the
* cookie was created.
*
* Because cookies are finite in size, wrapping/overflow is possible.
* This is more pronounced on 32-bit systems where cookies are 32 bits,
* where in theory wrapping could happen in about 14 hours assuming
* 25-microsecond expedited SRCU grace periods. However, a more likely
* overflow lower bound is on the order of 24 days in the case of
* one-millisecond SRCU grace periods. Of course, wrapping in a 64-bit
* system requires geologic timespans, as in more than seven million years
* even for expedited SRCU grace periods.
*
* Wrapping/overflow is much more of an issue for CONFIG_SMP=n systems
* that also have CONFIG_PREEMPTION=n, which selects Tiny SRCU. This uses
* a 16-bit cookie, which rcutorture routinely wraps in a matter of a
* few minutes. If this proves to be a problem, this counter will be
* expanded to the same size as for Tree SRCU.
*/
bool poll_state_synchronize_srcu(struct srcu_struct *ssp, unsigned long cookie)
{
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment