blob: e5b9df4d8078bf258da650ee239808648149a6a0 [file] [log] [blame]
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +02001Completions - "wait for completion" barrier APIs
2================================================
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +01003
4Introduction:
5-------------
6
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +02007If you have one or more threads that must wait for some kernel activity
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -06008to have reached a point or a specific state, completions can provide a
9race-free solution to this problem. Semantically they are somewhat like a
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020010pthread_barrier() and have similar use-cases.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010011
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -060012Completions are a code synchronization mechanism which is preferable to any
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020013misuse of locks/semaphores and busy-loops. Any time you think of using
14yield() or some quirky msleep(1) loop to allow something else to proceed,
15you probably want to look into using one of the wait_for_completion*()
16calls and complete() instead.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010017
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020018The advantage of using completions is that they have a well defined, focused
19purpose which makes it very easy to see the intent of the code, but they
20also result in more efficient code as all threads can continue execution
21until the result is actually needed, and both the waiting and the signalling
22is highly efficient using low level scheduler sleep/wakeup facilities.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010023
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020024Completions are built on top of the waitqueue and wakeup infrastructure of
25the Linux scheduler. The event the threads on the waitqueue are waiting for
26is reduced to a simple flag in 'struct completion', appropriately called "done".
27
28As completions are scheduling related, the code can be found in
Brian Norrisdc927262016-11-15 14:42:14 -080029kernel/sched/completion.c.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010030
31
32Usage:
33------
34
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020035There are three main parts to using completions:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010036
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020037 - the initialization of the 'struct completion' synchronization object
38 - the waiting part through a call to one of the variants of wait_for_completion(),
39 - the signaling side through a call to complete() or complete_all().
40
41There are also some helper functions for checking the state of completions.
42Note that while initialization must happen first, the waiting and signaling
43part can happen in any order. I.e. it's entirely normal for a thread
44to have marked a completion as 'done' before another thread checks whether
45it has to wait for it.
46
47To use completions you need to #include <linux/completion.h> and
48create a static or dynamic variable of type 'struct completion',
49which has only two fields:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010050
51 struct completion {
52 unsigned int done;
53 wait_queue_head_t wait;
54 };
55
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020056This provides the ->wait waitqueue to place tasks on for waiting (if any), and
57the ->done completion flag for indicating whether it's completed or not.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010058
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020059Completions should be named to refer to the event that is being synchronized on.
60A good example is:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010061
62 wait_for_completion(&early_console_added);
63
64 complete(&early_console_added);
65
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020066Good, intuitive naming (as always) helps code readability. Naming a completion
67'complete' is not helpful unless the purpose is super obvious...
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010068
69
70Initializing completions:
71-------------------------
72
Nicholas Mc Guire11e13692018-10-16 15:45:39 +020073Dynamically allocated completion objects should preferably be embedded in data
74structures that are assured to be alive for the life-time of the function/driver,
75to prevent races with asynchronous complete() calls from occurring.
76
77Particular care should be taken when using the _timeout() or _killable()/_interruptible()
78variants of wait_for_completion(), as it must be assured that memory de-allocation
79does not happen until all related activities (complete() or reinit_completion())
80have taken place, even if these wait functions return prematurely due to a timeout
81or a signal triggering.
82
83Initializing of dynamically allocated completion objects is done via a call to
84init_completion():
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010085
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020086 init_completion(&dynamic_object->done);
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010087
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020088In this call we initialize the waitqueue and set ->done to 0, i.e. "not completed"
89or "not done".
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010090
91The re-initialization function, reinit_completion(), simply resets the
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020092->done field to 0 ("not done"), without touching the waitqueue.
93Callers of this function must make sure that there are no racy
94wait_for_completion() calls going on in parallel.
95
96Calling init_completion() on the same completion object twice is
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +010097most likely a bug as it re-initializes the queue to an empty queue and
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +020098enqueued tasks could get "lost" - use reinit_completion() in that case,
99but be aware of other races.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100100
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200101For static declaration and initialization, macros are available.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100102
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200103For static (or global) declarations in file scope you can use DECLARE_COMPLETION():
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100104
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200105 static DECLARE_COMPLETION(setup_done);
106 DECLARE_COMPLETION(setup_done);
107
108Note that in this case the completion is boot time (or module load time)
109initialized to 'not done' and doesn't require an init_completion() call.
110
111When a completion is declared as a local variable within a function,
Nicholas Mc Guire11e13692018-10-16 15:45:39 +0200112then the initialization should always use DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK()
113explicitly, not just to make lockdep happy, but also to make it clear
114that limited scope had been considered and is intentional:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100115
116 DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(setup_done)
117
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200118Note that when using completion objects as local variables you must be
Nicholas Mc Guire11e13692018-10-16 15:45:39 +0200119acutely aware of the short life time of the function stack: the function
120must not return to a calling context until all activities (such as waiting
121threads) have ceased and the completion object is completely unused.
122
123To emphasise this again: in particular when using some of the waiting API variants
124with more complex outcomes, such as the timeout or signalling (_timeout(),
125_killable() and _interruptible()) variants, the wait might complete
126prematurely while the object might still be in use by another thread - and a return
127from the wait_on_completion*() caller function will deallocate the function
128stack and cause subtle data corruption if a complete() is done in some
129other thread. Simple testing might not trigger these kinds of races.
130
131If unsure, use dynamically allocated completion objects, preferably embedded
132in some other long lived object that has a boringly long life time which
133exceeds the life time of any helper threads using the completion object,
134or has a lock or other synchronization mechanism to make sure complete()
135is not called on a freed object.
136
137A naive DECLARE_COMPLETION() on the stack triggers a lockdep warning.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100138
139Waiting for completions:
140------------------------
141
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200142For a thread to wait for some concurrent activity to finish, it
143calls wait_for_completion() on the initialized completion structure:
144
145 void wait_for_completion(struct completion *done)
146
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100147A typical usage scenario is:
148
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200149 CPU#1 CPU#2
150
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600151 struct completion setup_done;
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200152
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100153 init_completion(&setup_done);
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200154 initialize_work(...,&setup_done,...);
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100155
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200156 /* run non-dependent code */ /* do setup */
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100157
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200158 wait_for_completion(&setup_done); complete(setup_done);
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100159
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200160This is not implying any particular order between wait_for_completion() and
161the call to complete() - if the call to complete() happened before the call
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100162to wait_for_completion() then the waiting side simply will continue
John Garry7b6abce2018-10-10 22:56:32 +0800163immediately as all dependencies are satisfied; if not, it will block until
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500164completion is signaled by complete().
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100165
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600166Note that wait_for_completion() is calling spin_lock_irq()/spin_unlock_irq(),
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100167so it can only be called safely when you know that interrupts are enabled.
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200168Calling it from IRQs-off atomic contexts will result in hard-to-detect
169spurious enabling of interrupts.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100170
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600171The default behavior is to wait without a timeout and to mark the task as
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100172uninterruptible. wait_for_completion() and its variants are only safe
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500173in process context (as they can sleep) but not in atomic context,
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200174interrupt context, with disabled IRQs, or preemption is disabled - see also
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500175try_wait_for_completion() below for handling completion in atomic/interrupt
176context.
177
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100178As all variants of wait_for_completion() can (obviously) block for a long
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200179time depending on the nature of the activity they are waiting for, so in
180most cases you probably don't want to call this with held mutexes.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100181
182
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200183wait_for_completion*() variants available:
184------------------------------------------
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100185
186The below variants all return status and this status should be checked in
187most(/all) cases - in cases where the status is deliberately not checked you
188probably want to make a note explaining this (e.g. see
189arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:__cpu_up()).
190
191A common problem that occurs is to have unclean assignment of return types,
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200192so take care to assign return-values to variables of the proper type.
193
194Checking for the specific meaning of return values also has been found
195to be quite inaccurate, e.g. constructs like:
196
197 if (!wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(...))
198
199... would execute the same code path for successful completion and for the
200interrupted case - which is probably not what you want.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100201
202 int wait_for_completion_interruptible(struct completion *done)
203
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200204This function marks the task TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE while it is waiting.
205If a signal was received while waiting it will return -ERESTARTSYS; 0 otherwise.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100206
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200207 unsigned long wait_for_completion_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100208
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500209The task is marked as TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE and will wait at most 'timeout'
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200210jiffies. If a timeout occurs it returns 0, else the remaining time in
211jiffies (but at least 1).
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100212
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200213Timeouts are preferably calculated with msecs_to_jiffies() or usecs_to_jiffies(),
214to make the code largely HZ-invariant.
215
216If the returned timeout value is deliberately ignored a comment should probably explain
217why (e.g. see drivers/mfd/wm8350-core.c wm8350_read_auxadc()).
218
219 long wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100220
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600221This function passes a timeout in jiffies and marks the task as
222TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. If a signal was received it will return -ERESTARTSYS;
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200223otherwise it returns 0 if the completion timed out, or the remaining time in
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600224jiffies if completion occurred.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100225
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600226Further variants include _killable which uses TASK_KILLABLE as the
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200227designated tasks state and will return -ERESTARTSYS if it is interrupted,
228or 0 if completion was achieved. There is a _timeout variant as well:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100229
230 long wait_for_completion_killable(struct completion *done)
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200231 long wait_for_completion_killable_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100232
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500233The _io variants wait_for_completion_io() behave the same as the non-_io
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200234variants, except for accounting waiting time as 'waiting on IO', which has
235an impact on how the task is accounted in scheduling/IO stats:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100236
237 void wait_for_completion_io(struct completion *done)
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200238 unsigned long wait_for_completion_io_timeout(struct completion *done, unsigned long timeout)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100239
240
241Signaling completions:
242----------------------
243
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500244A thread that wants to signal that the conditions for continuation have been
245achieved calls complete() to signal exactly one of the waiters that it can
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200246continue:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100247
248 void complete(struct completion *done)
249
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200250... or calls complete_all() to signal all current and future waiters:
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100251
252 void complete_all(struct completion *done)
253
254The signaling will work as expected even if completions are signaled before
255a thread starts waiting. This is achieved by the waiter "consuming"
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200256(decrementing) the done field of 'struct completion'. Waiting threads
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100257wakeup order is the same in which they were enqueued (FIFO order).
258
259If complete() is called multiple times then this will allow for that number
260of waiters to continue - each call to complete() will simply increment the
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200261done field. Calling complete_all() multiple times is a bug though. Both
262complete() and complete_all() can be called in IRQ/atomic context safely.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100263
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200264There can only be one thread calling complete() or complete_all() on a
265particular 'struct completion' at any time - serialized through the wait
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100266queue spinlock. Any such concurrent calls to complete() or complete_all()
267probably are a design bug.
268
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200269Signaling completion from IRQ context is fine as it will appropriately
Linus Torvalds01aa9d52018-10-24 18:01:11 +0100270lock with spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore() and it will never
271sleep.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100272
273
274try_wait_for_completion()/completion_done():
275--------------------------------------------
276
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500277The try_wait_for_completion() function will not put the thread on the wait
278queue but rather returns false if it would need to enqueue (block) the thread,
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600279else it consumes one posted completion and returns true.
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100280
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500281 bool try_wait_for_completion(struct completion *done)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100282
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200283Finally, to check the state of a completion without changing it in any way,
Jonathan Corbet7085f6c2015-03-27 10:16:35 -0600284call completion_done(), which returns false if there are no posted
285completions that were not yet consumed by waiters (implying that there are
286waiters) and true otherwise;
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100287
Nicholas Mc Guire4988aaa2015-02-20 12:28:48 -0500288 bool completion_done(struct completion *done)
Nicholas Mc Guire202799b2015-01-30 08:01:52 +0100289
290Both try_wait_for_completion() and completion_done() are safe to be called in
Ingo Molnar0c373342018-10-11 10:36:23 +0200291IRQ or atomic context.