Merge tag 'rcu.2022.12.02a' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu

Pull RCU updates from Paul McKenney:

 - Documentation updates. This is the second in a series from an ongoing
   review of the RCU documentation.

 - Miscellaneous fixes.

 - Introduce a default-off Kconfig option that depends on RCU_NOCB_CPU
   that, on CPUs mentioned in the nohz_full or rcu_nocbs boot-argument
   CPU lists, causes call_rcu() to introduce delays.

   These delays result in significant power savings on nearly idle
   Android and ChromeOS systems. These savings range from a few percent
   to more than ten percent.

   This series also includes several commits that change call_rcu() to a
   new call_rcu_hurry() function that avoids these delays in a few
   cases, for example, where timely wakeups are required. Several of
   these are outside of RCU and thus have acks and reviews from the
   relevant maintainers.

 - Create an srcu_read_lock_nmisafe() and an srcu_read_unlock_nmisafe()
   for architectures that support NMIs, but which do not provide
   NMI-safe this_cpu_inc(). These NMI-safe SRCU functions are required
   by the upcoming lockless printk() work by John Ogness et al.

 - Changes providing minor but important increases in torture test
   coverage for the new RCU polled-grace-period APIs.

 - Changes to torturescript that avoid redundant kernel builds, thus
   providing about a 30% speedup for the torture.sh acceptance test.

* tag 'rcu.2022.12.02a' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu: (49 commits)
  net: devinet: Reduce refcount before grace period
  net: Use call_rcu_hurry() for dst_release()
  workqueue: Make queue_rcu_work() use call_rcu_hurry()
  percpu-refcount: Use call_rcu_hurry() for atomic switch
  scsi/scsi_error: Use call_rcu_hurry() instead of call_rcu()
  rcu/rcutorture: Use call_rcu_hurry() where needed
  rcu/rcuscale: Use call_rcu_hurry() for async reader test
  rcu/sync: Use call_rcu_hurry() instead of call_rcu
  rcuscale: Add laziness and kfree tests
  rcu: Shrinker for lazy rcu
  rcu: Refactor code a bit in rcu_nocb_do_flush_bypass()
  rcu: Make call_rcu() lazy to save power
  rcu: Implement lockdep_rcu_enabled for !CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
  srcu: Debug NMI safety even on archs that don't require it
  srcu: Explain the reason behind the read side critical section on GP start
  srcu: Warn when NMI-unsafe API is used in NMI
  arch/s390: Add ARCH_HAS_NMI_SAFE_THIS_CPU_OPS Kconfig option
  arch/loongarch: Add ARCH_HAS_NMI_SAFE_THIS_CPU_OPS Kconfig option
  rcu: Fix __this_cpu_read() lockdep warning in rcu_force_quiescent_state()
  rcu-tasks: Make grace-period-age message human-readable
  ...

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 165 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst b/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index a5f2ff8fc54c..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,165 +0,0 @@
-.. _array_rcu_doc:
-
-Using RCU to Protect Read-Mostly Arrays
-=======================================
-
-Although RCU is more commonly used to protect linked lists, it can
-also be used to protect arrays.  Three situations are as follows:
-
-1.  :ref:`Hash Tables <hash_tables>`
-
-2.  :ref:`Static Arrays <static_arrays>`
-
-3.  :ref:`Resizable Arrays <resizable_arrays>`
-
-Each of these three situations involves an RCU-protected pointer to an
-array that is separately indexed.  It might be tempting to consider use
-of RCU to instead protect the index into an array, however, this use
-case is **not** supported.  The problem with RCU-protected indexes into
-arrays is that compilers can play way too many optimization games with
-integers, which means that the rules governing handling of these indexes
-are far more trouble than they are worth.  If RCU-protected indexes into
-arrays prove to be particularly valuable (which they have not thus far),
-explicit cooperation from the compiler will be required to permit them
-to be safely used.
-
-That aside, each of the three RCU-protected pointer situations are
-described in the following sections.
-
-.. _hash_tables:
-
-Situation 1: Hash Tables
-------------------------
-
-Hash tables are often implemented as an array, where each array entry
-has a linked-list hash chain.  Each hash chain can be protected by RCU
-as described in listRCU.rst.  This approach also applies to other
-array-of-list situations, such as radix trees.
-
-.. _static_arrays:
-
-Situation 2: Static Arrays
---------------------------
-
-Static arrays, where the data (rather than a pointer to the data) is
-located in each array element, and where the array is never resized,
-have not been used with RCU.  Rik van Riel recommends using seqlock in
-this situation, which would also have minimal read-side overhead as long
-as updates are rare.
-
-Quick Quiz:
-		Why is it so important that updates be rare when using seqlock?
-
-:ref:`Answer to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_seqlock>`
-
-.. _resizable_arrays:
-
-Situation 3: Resizable Arrays
-------------------------------
-
-Use of RCU for resizable arrays is demonstrated by the grow_ary()
-function formerly used by the System V IPC code.  The array is used
-to map from semaphore, message-queue, and shared-memory IDs to the data
-structure that represents the corresponding IPC construct.  The grow_ary()
-function does not acquire any locks; instead its caller must hold the
-ids->sem semaphore.
-
-The grow_ary() function, shown below, does some limit checks, allocates a
-new ipc_id_ary, copies the old to the new portion of the new, initializes
-the remainder of the new, updates the ids->entries pointer to point to
-the new array, and invokes ipc_rcu_putref() to free up the old array.
-Note that rcu_assign_pointer() is used to update the ids->entries pointer,
-which includes any memory barriers required on whatever architecture
-you are running on::
-
-	static int grow_ary(struct ipc_ids* ids, int newsize)
-	{
-		struct ipc_id_ary* new;
-		struct ipc_id_ary* old;
-		int i;
-		int size = ids->entries->size;
-
-		if(newsize > IPCMNI)
-			newsize = IPCMNI;
-		if(newsize <= size)
-			return newsize;
-
-		new = ipc_rcu_alloc(sizeof(struct kern_ipc_perm *)*newsize +
-				    sizeof(struct ipc_id_ary));
-		if(new == NULL)
-			return size;
-		new->size = newsize;
-		memcpy(new->p, ids->entries->p,
-		       sizeof(struct kern_ipc_perm *)*size +
-		       sizeof(struct ipc_id_ary));
-		for(i=size;i<newsize;i++) {
-			new->p[i] = NULL;
-		}
-		old = ids->entries;
-
-		/*
-		 * Use rcu_assign_pointer() to make sure the memcpyed
-		 * contents of the new array are visible before the new
-		 * array becomes visible.
-		 */
-		rcu_assign_pointer(ids->entries, new);
-
-		ipc_rcu_putref(old);
-		return newsize;
-	}
-
-The ipc_rcu_putref() function decrements the array's reference count
-and then, if the reference count has dropped to zero, uses call_rcu()
-to free the array after a grace period has elapsed.
-
-The array is traversed by the ipc_lock() function.  This function
-indexes into the array under the protection of rcu_read_lock(),
-using rcu_dereference() to pick up the pointer to the array so
-that it may later safely be dereferenced -- memory barriers are
-required on the Alpha CPU.  Since the size of the array is stored
-with the array itself, there can be no array-size mismatches, so
-a simple check suffices.  The pointer to the structure corresponding
-to the desired IPC object is placed in "out", with NULL indicating
-a non-existent entry.  After acquiring "out->lock", the "out->deleted"
-flag indicates whether the IPC object is in the process of being
-deleted, and, if not, the pointer is returned::
-
-	struct kern_ipc_perm* ipc_lock(struct ipc_ids* ids, int id)
-	{
-		struct kern_ipc_perm* out;
-		int lid = id % SEQ_MULTIPLIER;
-		struct ipc_id_ary* entries;
-
-		rcu_read_lock();
-		entries = rcu_dereference(ids->entries);
-		if(lid >= entries->size) {
-			rcu_read_unlock();
-			return NULL;
-		}
-		out = entries->p[lid];
-		if(out == NULL) {
-			rcu_read_unlock();
-			return NULL;
-		}
-		spin_lock(&out->lock);
-
-		/* ipc_rmid() may have already freed the ID while ipc_lock
-		 * was spinning: here verify that the structure is still valid
-		 */
-		if (out->deleted) {
-			spin_unlock(&out->lock);
-			rcu_read_unlock();
-			return NULL;
-		}
-		return out;
-	}
-
-.. _answer_quick_quiz_seqlock:
-
-Answer to Quick Quiz:
-	Why is it so important that updates be rare when using seqlock?
-
-	The reason that it is important that updates be rare when
-	using seqlock is that frequent updates can livelock readers.
-	One way to avoid this problem is to assign a seqlock for
-	each array entry rather than to the entire array.