| ================================================ | |
| 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; | |
| struct swait_queue_head 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. |