Re: [PATCH 06/15] stackdepot: fix and clean-up atomic annotations

[Andrey Konovalov]

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 10:34 AM Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/lib/stackdepot.c b/lib/stackdepot.c
> > index 93191ee70fc3..9ae71e1ef1a7 100644
> > --- a/lib/stackdepot.c
> > +++ b/lib/stackdepot.c
> > @@ -226,10 +226,10 @@ static void depot_init_pool(void **prealloc)
> >       /*
> >        * If the next pool is already initialized or the maximum number of
> >        * pools is reached, do not use the preallocated memory.
> > -      * smp_load_acquire() here pairs with smp_store_release() below and
> > -      * in depot_alloc_stack().
> > +      * READ_ONCE is only used to mark the variable as atomic,
> > +      * there are no concurrent writes.
>
> This doesn't make sense. If there are no concurrent writes, we should
> drop the marking, so that if there are concurrent writes, tools like
> KCSAN can tell us about it if our assumption was wrong.

Makes sense, will do in v2.

> > @@ -425,8 +424,8 @@ depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(unsigned long *entries,
> >        * Check if another stack pool needs to be initialized. If so, allocate
> >        * the memory now - we won't be able to do that under the lock.
> >        *
> > -      * The smp_load_acquire() here pairs with smp_store_release() to
> > -      * |next_pool_inited| in depot_alloc_stack() and depot_init_pool().
> > +      * smp_load_acquire pairs with smp_store_release
> > +      * in depot_alloc_stack and depot_init_pool.
>
> Reflow comment to match 80 cols used by comments elsewhere.

Will do in v2.

Thanks!