Merge drm/drm-next into drm-misc-next

Let's kick-off this release cycle.

Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>

4 files changed, 54 insertions, 26 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.rst b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.rst
index 42cc5d891bd2..048c5bc1f813 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.rst
@@ -66,8 +66,13 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	As a rough rule of thumb, any dereference of an RCU-protected
 	pointer must be covered by rcu_read_lock(), rcu_read_lock_bh(),
 	rcu_read_lock_sched(), or by the appropriate update-side lock.
-	Disabling of preemption can serve as rcu_read_lock_sched(), but
-	is less readable and prevents lockdep from detecting locking issues.
+	Explicit disabling of preemption (preempt_disable(), for example)
+	can serve as rcu_read_lock_sched(), but is less readable and
+	prevents lockdep from detecting locking issues.
+
+	Please not that you *cannot* rely on code known to be built
+	only in non-preemptible kernels.  Such code can and will break,
+	especially in kernels built with CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y.
 
 	Letting RCU-protected pointers "leak" out of an RCU read-side
 	critical section is every bit as bad as letting them leak out
@@ -185,6 +190,9 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 
 5.	If call_rcu() or call_srcu() is used, the callback function will
 	be called from softirq context.  In particular, it cannot block.
+	If you need the callback to block, run that code in a workqueue
+	handler scheduled from the callback.  The queue_rcu_work()
+	function does this for you in the case of call_rcu().
 
 6.	Since synchronize_rcu() can block, it cannot be called
 	from any sort of irq context.  The same rule applies
@@ -297,7 +305,8 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 		the machine.
 
 	d.	Periodically invoke synchronize_rcu(), permitting a limited
-		number of updates per grace period.
+		number of updates per grace period.  Better yet, periodically
+		invoke rcu_barrier() to wait for all outstanding callbacks.
 
 	The same cautions apply to call_srcu() and kfree_rcu().
 
@@ -477,6 +486,6 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	So if you need to wait for both an RCU grace period and for
 	all pre-existing call_rcu() callbacks, you will need to execute
 	both rcu_barrier() and synchronize_rcu(), if necessary, using
-	something like workqueues to to execute them concurrently.
+	something like workqueues to execute them concurrently.
 
 	See rcubarrier.rst for more information.
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/lockdep.rst b/Documentation/RCU/lockdep.rst
index cc860a0c296b..a94f55991a71 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/lockdep.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/lockdep.rst
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ checking of rcu_dereference() primitives:
 	rcu_access_pointer(p):
 		Return the value of the pointer and omit all barriers,
 		but retain the compiler constraints that prevent duplicating
-		or coalescsing.  This is useful when when testing the
+		or coalescsing.  This is useful when testing the
 		value of the pointer itself, for example, against NULL.
 
 The rcu_dereference_check() check expression can be any boolean
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst b/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
index 0b418a5b243c..81e828c8313b 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
@@ -128,10 +128,16 @@ Follow these rules to keep your RCU code working properly:
 		This sort of comparison occurs frequently when scanning
 		RCU-protected circular linked lists.
 
-		Note that if checks for being within an RCU read-side
-		critical section are not required and the pointer is never
-		dereferenced, rcu_access_pointer() should be used in place
-		of rcu_dereference().
+		Note that if the pointer comparison is done outside
+		of an RCU read-side critical section, and the pointer
+		is never dereferenced, rcu_access_pointer() should be
+		used in place of rcu_dereference().  In most cases,
+		it is best to avoid accidental dereferences by testing
+		the rcu_access_pointer() return value directly, without
+		assigning it to a variable.
+
+		Within an RCU read-side critical section, there is little
+		reason to use rcu_access_pointer().
 
 	-	The comparison is against a pointer that references memory
 		that was initialized "a long time ago."  The reason
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
index 77ea260efd12..1c747ac3f2c8 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.rst
@@ -6,13 +6,15 @@ What is RCU?  --  "Read, Copy, Update"
 Please note that the "What is RCU?" LWN series is an excellent place
 to start learning about RCU:
 
-| 1.	What is RCU, Fundamentally?  http://lwn.net/Articles/262464/
-| 2.	What is RCU? Part 2: Usage   http://lwn.net/Articles/263130/
-| 3.	RCU part 3: the RCU API      http://lwn.net/Articles/264090/
-| 4.	The RCU API, 2010 Edition    http://lwn.net/Articles/418853/
-| 	2010 Big API Table           http://lwn.net/Articles/419086/
-| 5.	The RCU API, 2014 Edition    http://lwn.net/Articles/609904/
-|	2014 Big API Table           http://lwn.net/Articles/609973/
+| 1.	What is RCU, Fundamentally?  https://lwn.net/Articles/262464/
+| 2.	What is RCU? Part 2: Usage   https://lwn.net/Articles/263130/
+| 3.	RCU part 3: the RCU API      https://lwn.net/Articles/264090/
+| 4.	The RCU API, 2010 Edition    https://lwn.net/Articles/418853/
+| 	2010 Big API Table           https://lwn.net/Articles/419086/
+| 5.	The RCU API, 2014 Edition    https://lwn.net/Articles/609904/
+|	2014 Big API Table           https://lwn.net/Articles/609973/
+| 6.	The RCU API, 2019 Edition    https://lwn.net/Articles/777036/
+|	2019 Big API Table           https://lwn.net/Articles/777165/
 
 
 What is RCU?
@@ -915,13 +917,18 @@ which an RCU reference is held include:
 The understanding that RCU provides a reference that only prevents a
 change of type is particularly visible with objects allocated from a
 slab cache marked ``SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU``.  RCU operations may yield a
-reference to an object from such a cache that has been concurrently
-freed and the memory reallocated to a completely different object,
-though of the same type.  In this case RCU doesn't even protect the
-identity of the object from changing, only its type.  So the object
-found may not be the one expected, but it will be one where it is safe
-to take a reference or spinlock and then confirm that the identity
-matches the expectations.
+reference to an object from such a cache that has been concurrently freed
+and the memory reallocated to a completely different object, though of
+the same type.  In this case RCU doesn't even protect the identity of the
+object from changing, only its type.  So the object found may not be the
+one expected, but it will be one where it is safe to take a reference
+(and then potentially acquiring a spinlock), allowing subsequent code
+to check whether the identity matches expectations.  It is tempting
+to simply acquire the spinlock without first taking the reference, but
+unfortunately any spinlock in a ``SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU`` object must be
+initialized after each and every call to kmem_cache_alloc(), which renders
+reference-free spinlock acquisition completely unsafe.  Therefore, when
+using ``SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU``, make proper use of a reference counter.
 
 With traditional reference counting -- such as that implemented by the
 kref library in Linux -- there is typically code that runs when the last
@@ -1057,14 +1064,20 @@ SRCU: Initialization/cleanup::
 	init_srcu_struct
 	cleanup_srcu_struct
 
-All: lockdep-checked RCU-protected pointer access::
+All: lockdep-checked RCU utility APIs::
 
-	rcu_access_pointer
-	rcu_dereference_raw
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN
 	rcu_sleep_check
 	RCU_NONIDLE
 
+All: Unchecked RCU-protected pointer access::
+
+	rcu_dereference_raw
+
+All: Unchecked RCU-protected pointer access with dereferencing prohibited::
+
+	rcu_access_pointer
+
 See the comment headers in the source code (or the docbook generated
 from them) for more information.