Merge branch 'core-rcu-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip

* 'core-rcu-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip: (52 commits)
  sched: fix RCU lockdep splat from task_group()
  rcu: using ACCESS_ONCE() to observe the jiffies_stall/rnp->qsmask value
  sched: suppress RCU lockdep splat in task_fork_fair
  net: suppress RCU lockdep false positive in sock_update_classid
  rcu: move check from rcu_dereference_bh to rcu_read_lock_bh_held
  rcu: Add advice to PROVE_RCU_REPEATEDLY kernel config parameter
  rcu: Add tracing data to support queueing models
  rcu: fix sparse errors in rcutorture.c
  rcu: only one evaluation of arg in rcu_dereference_check() unless sparse
  kernel: Remove undead ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
  rcu: fix _oddness handling of verbose stall warnings
  rcu: performance fixes to TINY_PREEMPT_RCU callback checking
  rcu: upgrade stallwarn.txt documentation for CPU-bound RT processes
  vhost: add __rcu annotations
  rcu: add comment stating that list_empty() applies to RCU-protected lists
  rcu: apply TINY_PREEMPT_RCU read-side speedup to TREE_PREEMPT_RCU
  rcu: combine duplicate code, courtesy of CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU
  rcu: Upgrade srcu_read_lock() docbook about SRCU grace periods
  rcu: document ways of stalling updates in low-memory situations
  rcu: repair code-duplication FIXMEs
  ...

Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl

@@ -1645,7 +1645,9 @@ the amount of locking which needs to be done.
       all the readers who were traversing the list when we deleted the
       element are finished.  We use <function>call_rcu()</function> to
       register a callback which will actually destroy the object once
-      the readers are finished.
+      all pre-existing readers are finished.  Alternatively,
+      <function>synchronize_rcu()</function> may be used to block until
+      all pre-existing are finished.
     </para>
     <para>
       But how does Read Copy Update know when the readers are
@@ -1714,7 +1716,7 @@ the amount of locking which needs to be done.
 -        object_put(obj);
 +        list_del_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;list);
          cache_num--;
-+        call_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;rcu, cache_delete_rcu, obj);
++        call_rcu(&amp;obj-&gt;rcu, cache_delete_rcu);
  }
 
  /* Must be holding cache_lock */
@@ -1725,14 +1727,6 @@ the amount of locking which needs to be done.
          if (++cache_num > MAX_CACHE_SIZE) {
                  struct object *i, *outcast = NULL;
                  list_for_each_entry(i, &amp;cache, list) {
-@@ -85,6 +94,7 @@
-         obj-&gt;popularity = 0;
-         atomic_set(&amp;obj-&gt;refcnt, 1); /* The cache holds a reference */
-         spin_lock_init(&amp;obj-&gt;lock);
-+        INIT_RCU_HEAD(&amp;obj-&gt;rcu);
-
-         spin_lock_irqsave(&amp;cache_lock, flags);
-         __cache_add(obj);
 @@ -104,12 +114,11 @@
  struct object *cache_find(int id)
  {

Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt

@@ -218,13 +218,22 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	include:
 
 	a.	Keeping a count of the number of data-structure elements
-		used by the RCU-protected data structure, including those
-		waiting for a grace period to elapse.  Enforce a limit
-		on this number, stalling updates as needed to allow
-		previously deferred frees to complete.
+		used by the RCU-protected data structure, including
+		those waiting for a grace period to elapse.  Enforce a
+		limit on this number, stalling updates as needed to allow
+		previously deferred frees to complete.	Alternatively,
+		limit only the number awaiting deferred free rather than
+		the total number of elements.
 
-		Alternatively, limit only the number awaiting deferred
-		free rather than the total number of elements.
+		One way to stall the updates is to acquire the update-side
+		mutex.	(Don't try this with a spinlock -- other CPUs
+		spinning on the lock could prevent the grace period
+		from ever ending.)  Another way to stall the updates
+		is for the updates to use a wrapper function around
+		the memory allocator, so that this wrapper function
+		simulates OOM when there is too much memory awaiting an
+		RCU grace period.  There are of course many other
+		variations on this theme.
 
 	b.	Limiting update rate.  For example, if updates occur only
 		once per hour, then no explicit rate limiting is required,
@@ -365,3 +374,26 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	and the compiler to freely reorder code into and out of RCU
 	read-side critical sections.  It is the responsibility of the
 	RCU update-side primitives to deal with this.
+
+17.	Use CONFIG_PROVE_RCU, CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD, and
+	the __rcu sparse checks to validate your RCU code.  These
+	can help find problems as follows:
+
+	CONFIG_PROVE_RCU: check that accesses to RCU-protected data
+		structures are carried out under the proper RCU
+		read-side critical section, while holding the right
+		combination of locks, or whatever other conditions
+		are appropriate.
+
+	CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD: check that you don't pass the
+		same object to call_rcu() (or friends) before an RCU
+		grace period has elapsed since the last time that you
+		passed that same object to call_rcu() (or friends).
+
+	__rcu sparse checks: tag the pointer to the RCU-protected data
+		structure with __rcu, and sparse will warn you if you
+		access that pointer without the services of one of the
+		variants of rcu_dereference().
+
+	These debugging aids can help you find problems that are
+	otherwise extremely difficult to spot.

Documentation/RCU/stallwarn.txt

@@ -80,6 +80,24 @@ o	A CPU looping with bottom halves disabled.  This condition can
 o	For !CONFIG_PREEMPT kernels, a CPU looping anywhere in the kernel
 	without invoking schedule().
 
+o	A CPU-bound real-time task in a CONFIG_PREEMPT kernel, which might
+	happen to preempt a low-priority task in the middle of an RCU
+	read-side critical section.   This is especially damaging if
+	that low-priority task is not permitted to run on any other CPU,
+	in which case the next RCU grace period can never complete, which
+	will eventually cause the system to run out of memory and hang.
+	While the system is in the process of running itself out of
+	memory, you might see stall-warning messages.
+
+o	A CPU-bound real-time task in a CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT kernel that
+	is running at a higher priority than the RCU softirq threads.
+	This will prevent RCU callbacks from ever being invoked,
+	and in a CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU kernel will further prevent
+	RCU grace periods from ever completing.  Either way, the
+	system will eventually run out of memory and hang.  In the
+	CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU case, you might see stall-warning
+	messages.
+
 o	A bug in the RCU implementation.
 
 o	A hardware failure.  This is quite unlikely, but has occurred

Documentation/RCU/trace.txt

@@ -125,6 +125,17 @@ o	"b" is the batch limit for this CPU.  If more than this number
 	of RCU callbacks is ready to invoke, then the remainder will
 	be deferred.
 
+o	"ci" is the number of RCU callbacks that have been invoked for
+	this CPU.  Note that ci+ql is the number of callbacks that have
+	been registered in absence of CPU-hotplug activity.
+
+o	"co" is the number of RCU callbacks that have been orphaned due to
+	this CPU going offline.
+
+o	"ca" is the number of RCU callbacks that have been adopted due to
+	other CPUs going offline.  Note that ci+co-ca+ql is the number of
+	RCU callbacks registered on this CPU.
+
 There is also an rcu/rcudata.csv file with the same information in
 comma-separated-variable spreadsheet format.
 
@@ -180,7 +191,7 @@ o	"s" is the "signaled" state that drives force_quiescent_state()'s
 
 o	"jfq" is the number of jiffies remaining for this grace period
 	before force_quiescent_state() is invoked to help push things
-	along.  Note that CPUs in dyntick-idle mode thoughout the grace
+	along.  Note that CPUs in dyntick-idle mode throughout the grace
 	period will not report on their own, but rather must be check by
 	some other CPU via force_quiescent_state().