LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from IDR to XArray
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 13:10:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2879439.WEJLM9RBEh@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YSyg/Db1So0LDGR+@hovoldconsulting.com>

On Monday, August 30, 2021 11:12:28 AM CEST Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:22:50AM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Convert greybus/uart.c from IDR to XArray. The abstract data type XArray
> > is more memory-efficient, parallelisable, and cache friendly. It takes
> > advantage of RCU to perform lookups without locking. Furthermore, IDR is
> > deprecated because XArray has a better (cleaner and more consistent) API.
> 
> Where does it say that IDR is deprecated? Almost all drivers use IDR/IDA
> and its interfaces are straight-forward. In most cases we don't care
> about a possible slight increase in efficiency either, and so also in
> this case. Correctness is what matters and doing these conversions risks
> introducing regressions.
> 
> And I believe IDR use XArray internally these days anyway.

Please read the following message by Matthew Wilcox for an authoritative response to your
doubts about efficiency of XArray and IDR deprecation:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210503182629.GE1847222@casper.infradead.org/

In particular he says that "[] The advantage of the XArray over the IDR is that it has a better 
API (and the IDR interface is deprecated).".

> > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > v3->v4: 
> > 	Remove mutex_lock/unlock around xa_load(). These locks seem to
> > 	be unnecessary because there is a 1:1 correspondence between
> > 	a specific minor and its gb_tty and there is no reference
> > 	counting. I think that the RCU locks used inside xa_load()
> > 	are sufficient to protect this API from returning an invalid
> > 	gb_tty in case of concurrent access. Some more considerations 
> > 	on this topic are in the following message to linux-kernel list:
> > 	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3554184.2JXonMZcNW@localhost.localdomain/
> 
> This just doesn't make sense (and a valid motivation would need to go in
> the commit message if there was one).

OK, I'll take your words on it. Alex Elder wrote that he guess the mutex_lock/unlock()
around xa_load() are probably not necessary. As I said I don't yet have knowledge of 
this kind of topics, so I was just attempting to find out a reason why. Now I know that 
my v1 was correct in having those Mutexes as the original code with IDR had.
>
> > [...]
> 
> You can't just drop the locking here since you'd introduce a potential
> use-after-free in case gb_tty is freed after the lookup but before the
> port reference is taken.
> 
> That said, this driver is already broken since it can currently free the
> gb_tty while there are references to the port. I'll try to fix it up...
> 
> >  	return gb_tty;
> >  }
> 
> But as you may have gathered, I don't think doing these conversions is a
> good idea.
> 
> Johan
> 

Thanks for your review,

Fabio




  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-30 11:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-29  9:22 Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-30  9:12 ` Johan Hovold
2021-08-30 11:10   ` Fabio M. De Francesco [this message]
2021-08-30 11:52     ` Johan Hovold
2021-08-30 12:16       ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-08-30 12:33         ` Johan Hovold
2021-08-30 13:16           ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-30 13:20           ` [greybus-dev] " Alex Elder
2021-08-31  8:07             ` Johan Hovold
2021-08-31 10:42               ` Alex Elder
2021-08-31 11:51                 ` Johan Hovold
2021-08-31 11:50               ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-31 12:18                 ` Johan Hovold
2021-09-01 12:09                 ` Alex Elder
2021-09-01 13:56                   ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-09-01 14:29                     ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-09-01 15:39                       ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-08-30 13:31           ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-08-31  8:16             ` Johan Hovold

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=2879439.WEJLM9RBEh@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=fmdefrancesco@gmail.com \
    --cc=elder@kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=johan@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v4] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from IDR to XArray' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).