| |
| krefs allow you to add reference counters to your objects. If you |
| have objects that are used in multiple places and passed around, and |
| you don't have refcounts, your code is almost certainly broken. If |
| you want refcounts, krefs are the way to go. |
| |
| To use a kref, add one to your data structures like: |
| |
| struct my_data |
| { |
| . |
| . |
| struct kref refcount; |
| . |
| . |
| }; |
| |
| The kref can occur anywhere within the data structure. |
| |
| You must initialize the kref after you allocate it. To do this, call |
| kref_init as so: |
| |
| struct my_data *data; |
| |
| data = kmalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL); |
| if (!data) |
| return -ENOMEM; |
| kref_init(&data->refcount); |
| |
| This sets the refcount in the kref to 1. |
| |
| Once you have an initialized kref, you must follow the following |
| rules: |
| |
| 1) If you make a non-temporary copy of a pointer, especially if |
| it can be passed to another thread of execution, you must |
| increment the refcount with kref_get() before passing it off: |
| kref_get(&data->refcount); |
| If you already have a valid pointer to a kref-ed structure (the |
| refcount cannot go to zero) you may do this without a lock. |
| |
| 2) When you are done with a pointer, you must call kref_put(): |
| kref_put(&data->refcount, data_release); |
| If this is the last reference to the pointer, the release |
| routine will be called. If the code never tries to get |
| a valid pointer to a kref-ed structure without already |
| holding a valid pointer, it is safe to do this without |
| a lock. |
| |
| 3) If the code attempts to gain a reference to a kref-ed structure |
| without already holding a valid pointer, it must serialize access |
| where a kref_put() cannot occur during the kref_get(), and the |
| structure must remain valid during the kref_get(). |
| |
| For example, if you allocate some data and then pass it to another |
| thread to process: |
| |
| void data_release(struct kref *ref) |
| { |
| struct my_data *data = container_of(ref, struct my_data, refcount); |
| kfree(data); |
| } |
| |
| void more_data_handling(void *cb_data) |
| { |
| struct my_data *data = cb_data; |
| . |
| . do stuff with data here |
| . |
| kref_put(&data->refcount, data_release); |
| } |
| |
| int my_data_handler(void) |
| { |
| int rv = 0; |
| struct my_data *data; |
| struct task_struct *task; |
| data = kmalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL); |
| if (!data) |
| return -ENOMEM; |
| kref_init(&data->refcount); |
| |
| kref_get(&data->refcount); |
| task = kthread_run(more_data_handling, data, "more_data_handling"); |
| if (task == ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM)) { |
| rv = -ENOMEM; |
| kref_put(&data->refcount, data_release); |
| goto out; |
| } |
| |
| . |
| . do stuff with data here |
| . |
| out: |
| kref_put(&data->refcount, data_release); |
| return rv; |
| } |
| |
| This way, it doesn't matter what order the two threads handle the |
| data, the kref_put() handles knowing when the data is not referenced |
| any more and releasing it. The kref_get() does not require a lock, |
| since we already have a valid pointer that we own a refcount for. The |
| put needs no lock because nothing tries to get the data without |
| already holding a pointer. |
| |
| Note that the "before" in rule 1 is very important. You should never |
| do something like: |
| |
| task = kthread_run(more_data_handling, data, "more_data_handling"); |
| if (task == ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM)) { |
| rv = -ENOMEM; |
| goto out; |
| } else |
| /* BAD BAD BAD - get is after the handoff */ |
| kref_get(&data->refcount); |
| |
| Don't assume you know what you are doing and use the above construct. |
| First of all, you may not know what you are doing. Second, you may |
| know what you are doing (there are some situations where locking is |
| involved where the above may be legal) but someone else who doesn't |
| know what they are doing may change the code or copy the code. It's |
| bad style. Don't do it. |
| |
| There are some situations where you can optimize the gets and puts. |
| For instance, if you are done with an object and enqueuing it for |
| something else or passing it off to something else, there is no reason |
| to do a get then a put: |
| |
| /* Silly extra get and put */ |
| kref_get(&obj->ref); |
| enqueue(obj); |
| kref_put(&obj->ref, obj_cleanup); |
| |
| Just do the enqueue. A comment about this is always welcome: |
| |
| enqueue(obj); |
| /* We are done with obj, so we pass our refcount off |
| to the queue. DON'T TOUCH obj AFTER HERE! */ |
| |
| The last rule (rule 3) is the nastiest one to handle. Say, for |
| instance, you have a list of items that are each kref-ed, and you wish |
| to get the first one. You can't just pull the first item off the list |
| and kref_get() it. That violates rule 3 because you are not already |
| holding a valid pointer. You must add a mutex (or some other lock). |
| For instance: |
| |
| static DEFINE_MUTEX(mutex); |
| static LIST_HEAD(q); |
| struct my_data |
| { |
| struct kref refcount; |
| struct list_head link; |
| }; |
| |
| static struct my_data *get_entry() |
| { |
| struct my_data *entry = NULL; |
| mutex_lock(&mutex); |
| if (!list_empty(&q)) { |
| entry = container_of(q.next, struct my_q_entry, link); |
| kref_get(&entry->refcount); |
| } |
| mutex_unlock(&mutex); |
| return entry; |
| } |
| |
| static void release_entry(struct kref *ref) |
| { |
| struct my_data *entry = container_of(ref, struct my_data, refcount); |
| |
| list_del(&entry->link); |
| kfree(entry); |
| } |
| |
| static void put_entry(struct my_data *entry) |
| { |
| mutex_lock(&mutex); |
| kref_put(&entry->refcount, release_entry); |
| mutex_unlock(&mutex); |
| } |
| |
| The kref_put() return value is useful if you do not want to hold the |
| lock during the whole release operation. Say you didn't want to call |
| kfree() with the lock held in the example above (since it is kind of |
| pointless to do so). You could use kref_put() as follows: |
| |
| static void release_entry(struct kref *ref) |
| { |
| /* All work is done after the return from kref_put(). */ |
| } |
| |
| static void put_entry(struct my_data *entry) |
| { |
| mutex_lock(&mutex); |
| if (kref_put(&entry->refcount, release_entry)) { |
| list_del(&entry->link); |
| mutex_unlock(&mutex); |
| kfree(entry); |
| } else |
| mutex_unlock(&mutex); |
| } |
| |
| This is really more useful if you have to call other routines as part |
| of the free operations that could take a long time or might claim the |
| same lock. Note that doing everything in the release routine is still |
| preferred as it is a little neater. |
| |
| |
| Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org> |
| |
| A lot of this was lifted from Greg Kroah-Hartman's 2004 OLS paper and |
| presentation on krefs, which can be found at: |
| http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2004_kref_paper/Reprint-Kroah-Hartman-OLS2004.pdf |
| and: |
| http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2004_kref_talk/ |
| |