d6a3b24762
In order to prepare to add them to the Kernel API book, convert the files to ReST format. The conversion is actually: - add blank lines and identation in order to identify paragraphs; - fix tables markups; - add some lists markups; - mark literal blocks; - adjust title markups. At its new index.rst, let's add a :orphan: while this is not linked to the main index.rst file, in order to avoid build warnings. Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
294 lines
12 KiB
ReStructuredText
294 lines
12 KiB
ReStructuredText
================================================
|
|
Completions - "wait for completion" barrier APIs
|
|
================================================
|
|
|
|
Introduction:
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
If you have one or more threads that must wait for some kernel activity
|
|
to have reached a point or a specific state, completions can provide a
|
|
race-free solution to this problem. Semantically they are somewhat like a
|
|
pthread_barrier() and have similar use-cases.
|
|
|
|
Completions are a code synchronization mechanism which is preferable to any
|
|
misuse of locks/semaphores and busy-loops. Any time you think of using
|
|
yield() or some quirky msleep(1) loop to allow something else to proceed,
|
|
you probably want to look into using one of the wait_for_completion*()
|
|
calls and complete() instead.
|
|
|
|
The advantage of using completions is that they have a well defined, focused
|
|
purpose which makes it very easy to see the intent of the code, but they
|
|
also result in more efficient code as all threads can continue execution
|
|
until the result is actually needed, and both the waiting and the signalling
|
|
is highly efficient using low level scheduler sleep/wakeup facilities.
|
|
|
|
Completions are built on top of the waitqueue and wakeup infrastructure of
|
|
the Linux scheduler. The event the threads on the waitqueue are waiting for
|
|
is reduced to a simple flag in 'struct completion', appropriately called "done".
|
|
|
|
As completions are scheduling related, the code can be found in
|
|
kernel/sched/completion.c.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Usage:
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
There are three main parts to using completions:
|
|
|
|
- the initialization of the 'struct completion' synchronization object
|
|
- the waiting part through a call to one of the variants of wait_for_completion(),
|
|
- the signaling side through a call to complete() or complete_all().
|
|
|
|
There are also some helper functions for checking the state of completions.
|
|
Note that while initialization must happen first, the waiting and signaling
|
|
part can happen in any order. I.e. it's entirely normal for a thread
|
|
to have marked a completion as 'done' before another thread checks whether
|
|
it has to wait for it.
|
|
|
|
To use completions you need to #include <linux/completion.h> and
|
|
create a static or dynamic variable of type 'struct completion',
|
|
which has only two fields::
|
|
|
|
struct completion {
|
|
unsigned int done;
|
|
wait_queue_head_t wait;
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
This provides the ->wait waitqueue to place tasks on for waiting (if any), and
|
|
the ->done completion flag for indicating whether it's completed or not.
|
|
|
|
Completions should be named to refer to the event that is being synchronized on.
|
|
A good example is::
|
|
|
|
wait_for_completion(&early_console_added);
|
|
|
|
complete(&early_console_added);
|
|
|
|
Good, intuitive naming (as always) helps code readability. Naming a completion
|
|
'complete' is not helpful unless the purpose is super obvious...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initializing completions:
|
|
-------------------------
|
|
|
|
Dynamically allocated completion objects should preferably be embedded in data
|
|
structures that are assured to be alive for the life-time of the function/driver,
|
|
to prevent races with asynchronous complete() calls from occurring.
|
|
|
|
Particular care should be taken when using the _timeout() or _killable()/_interruptible()
|
|
variants of wait_for_completion(), as it must be assured that memory de-allocation
|
|
does not happen until all related activities (complete() or reinit_completion())
|
|
have taken place, even if these wait functions return prematurely due to a timeout
|
|
or a signal triggering.
|
|
|
|
Initializing of dynamically allocated completion objects is done via a call to
|
|
init_completion()::
|
|
|
|
init_completion(&dynamic_object->done);
|
|
|
|
In this call we initialize the waitqueue and set ->done to 0, i.e. "not completed"
|
|
or "not done".
|
|
|
|
The re-initialization function, reinit_completion(), simply resets the
|
|
->done field to 0 ("not done"), without touching the waitqueue.
|
|
Callers of this function must make sure that there are no racy
|
|
wait_for_completion() calls going on in parallel.
|
|
|
|
Calling init_completion() on the same completion object twice is
|
|
most likely a bug as it re-initializes the queue to an empty queue and
|
|
enqueued tasks could get "lost" - use reinit_completion() in that case,
|
|
but be aware of other races.
|
|
|
|
For static declaration and initialization, macros are available.
|
|
|
|
For static (or global) declarations in file scope you can use
|
|
DECLARE_COMPLETION()::
|
|
|
|
static DECLARE_COMPLETION(setup_done);
|
|
DECLARE_COMPLETION(setup_done);
|
|
|
|
Note that in this case the completion is boot time (or module load time)
|
|
initialized to 'not done' and doesn't require an init_completion() call.
|
|
|
|
When a completion is declared as a local variable within a function,
|
|
then the initialization should always use DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK()
|
|
explicitly, not just to make lockdep happy, but also to make it clear
|
|
that limited scope had been considered and is intentional::
|
|
|
|
DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(setup_done)
|
|
|
|
Note that when using completion objects as local variables you must be
|
|
acutely aware of the short life time of the function stack: the function
|
|
must not return to a calling context until all activities (such as waiting
|
|
threads) have ceased and the completion object is completely unused.
|
|
|
|
To emphasise this again: in particular when using some of the waiting API variants
|
|
with more complex outcomes, such as the timeout or signalling (_timeout(),
|
|
_killable() and _interruptible()) variants, the wait might complete
|
|
prematurely while the object might still be in use by another thread - and a return
|
|
from the wait_on_completion*() caller function will deallocate the function
|
|
stack and cause subtle data corruption if a complete() is done in some
|
|
other thread. Simple testing might not trigger these kinds of races.
|
|
|
|
If unsure, use dynamically allocated completion objects, preferably embedded
|
|
in some other long lived object that has a boringly long life time which
|
|
exceeds the life time of any helper threads using the completion object,
|
|
or has a lock or other synchronization mechanism to make sure complete()
|
|
is not called on a freed object.
|
|
|
|
A naive DECLARE_COMPLETION() on the stack triggers a lockdep warning.
|
|
|
|
Waiting for completions:
|
|
------------------------
|
|
|
|
For a thread to wait for some concurrent activity to finish, it
|
|
calls wait_for_completion() on the initialized completion structure::
|
|
|
|
void wait_for_completion(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
A typical usage scenario is::
|
|
|
|
CPU#1 CPU#2
|
|
|
|
struct completion setup_done;
|
|
|
|
init_completion(&setup_done);
|
|
initialize_work(...,&setup_done,...);
|
|
|
|
/* run non-dependent code */ /* do setup */
|
|
|
|
wait_for_completion(&setup_done); complete(setup_done);
|
|
|
|
This is not implying any particular order between wait_for_completion() and
|
|
the call to complete() - if the call to complete() happened before the call
|
|
to wait_for_completion() then the waiting side simply will continue
|
|
immediately as all dependencies are satisfied; if not, it will block until
|
|
completion is signaled by complete().
|
|
|
|
Note that wait_for_completion() is calling spin_lock_irq()/spin_unlock_irq(),
|
|
so it can only be called safely when you know that interrupts are enabled.
|
|
Calling it from IRQs-off atomic contexts will result in hard-to-detect
|
|
spurious enabling of interrupts.
|
|
|
|
The default behavior is to wait without a timeout and to mark the task as
|
|
uninterruptible. wait_for_completion() and its variants are only safe
|
|
in process context (as they can sleep) but not in atomic context,
|
|
interrupt context, with disabled IRQs, or preemption is disabled - see also
|
|
try_wait_for_completion() below for handling completion in atomic/interrupt
|
|
context.
|
|
|
|
As all variants of wait_for_completion() can (obviously) block for a long
|
|
time depending on the nature of the activity they are waiting for, so in
|
|
most cases you probably don't want to call this with held mutexes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
wait_for_completion*() variants available:
|
|
------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The below variants all return status and this status should be checked in
|
|
most(/all) cases - in cases where the status is deliberately not checked you
|
|
probably want to make a note explaining this (e.g. see
|
|
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:__cpu_up()).
|
|
|
|
A common problem that occurs is to have unclean assignment of return types,
|
|
so take care to assign return-values to variables of the proper type.
|
|
|
|
Checking for the specific meaning of return values also has been found
|
|
to be quite inaccurate, e.g. constructs like::
|
|
|
|
if (!wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(...))
|
|
|
|
... would execute the same code path for successful completion and for the
|
|
interrupted case - which is probably not what you want::
|
|
|
|
int wait_for_completion_interruptible(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
This function marks the task TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE while it is waiting.
|
|
If a signal was received while waiting it will return -ERESTARTSYS; 0 otherwise::
|
|
|
|
unsigned long wait_for_completion_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
|
|
|
|
The task is marked as TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE and will wait at most 'timeout'
|
|
jiffies. If a timeout occurs it returns 0, else the remaining time in
|
|
jiffies (but at least 1).
|
|
|
|
Timeouts are preferably calculated with msecs_to_jiffies() or usecs_to_jiffies(),
|
|
to make the code largely HZ-invariant.
|
|
|
|
If the returned timeout value is deliberately ignored a comment should probably explain
|
|
why (e.g. see drivers/mfd/wm8350-core.c wm8350_read_auxadc())::
|
|
|
|
long wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
|
|
|
|
This function passes a timeout in jiffies and marks the task as
|
|
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. If a signal was received it will return -ERESTARTSYS;
|
|
otherwise it returns 0 if the completion timed out, or the remaining time in
|
|
jiffies if completion occurred.
|
|
|
|
Further variants include _killable which uses TASK_KILLABLE as the
|
|
designated tasks state and will return -ERESTARTSYS if it is interrupted,
|
|
or 0 if completion was achieved. There is a _timeout variant as well::
|
|
|
|
long wait_for_completion_killable(struct completion *done)
|
|
long wait_for_completion_killable_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
|
|
|
|
The _io variants wait_for_completion_io() behave the same as the non-_io
|
|
variants, except for accounting waiting time as 'waiting on IO', which has
|
|
an impact on how the task is accounted in scheduling/IO stats::
|
|
|
|
void wait_for_completion_io(struct completion *done)
|
|
unsigned long wait_for_completion_io_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signaling completions:
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
A thread that wants to signal that the conditions for continuation have been
|
|
achieved calls complete() to signal exactly one of the waiters that it can
|
|
continue::
|
|
|
|
void complete(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
... or calls complete_all() to signal all current and future waiters::
|
|
|
|
void complete_all(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
The signaling will work as expected even if completions are signaled before
|
|
a thread starts waiting. This is achieved by the waiter "consuming"
|
|
(decrementing) the done field of 'struct completion'. Waiting threads
|
|
wakeup order is the same in which they were enqueued (FIFO order).
|
|
|
|
If complete() is called multiple times then this will allow for that number
|
|
of waiters to continue - each call to complete() will simply increment the
|
|
done field. Calling complete_all() multiple times is a bug though. Both
|
|
complete() and complete_all() can be called in IRQ/atomic context safely.
|
|
|
|
There can only be one thread calling complete() or complete_all() on a
|
|
particular 'struct completion' at any time - serialized through the wait
|
|
queue spinlock. Any such concurrent calls to complete() or complete_all()
|
|
probably are a design bug.
|
|
|
|
Signaling completion from IRQ context is fine as it will appropriately
|
|
lock with spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore() and it will never
|
|
sleep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
try_wait_for_completion()/completion_done():
|
|
--------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The try_wait_for_completion() function will not put the thread on the wait
|
|
queue but rather returns false if it would need to enqueue (block) the thread,
|
|
else it consumes one posted completion and returns true::
|
|
|
|
bool try_wait_for_completion(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
Finally, to check the state of a completion without changing it in any way,
|
|
call completion_done(), which returns false if there are no posted
|
|
completions that were not yet consumed by waiters (implying that there are
|
|
waiters) and true otherwise::
|
|
|
|
bool completion_done(struct completion *done)
|
|
|
|
Both try_wait_for_completion() and completion_done() are safe to be called in
|
|
IRQ or atomic context.
|