rcu: make memory barriers more explicit

Prepare for introducing smp_mb_placeholder() and smp_mb_global().
The new smp_mb() in synchronize_rcu() is not strictly necessary, since
the first atomic_mb_set for rcu_gp_ctr provides the required ordering.
However, synchronize_rcu is not performance critical, and it *will* be
necessary to introduce a smp_mb_global before calling wait_for_readers().

Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/util/rcu.c b/util/rcu.c
index f4d09c8..7366dc5 100644
--- a/util/rcu.c
+++ b/util/rcu.c
@@ -92,8 +92,9 @@ static void wait_for_readers(void)
             atomic_set(&index->waiting, true);
         }
 
-        /* Here, order the stores to index->waiting before the
-         * loads of index->ctr.
+        /* Here, order the stores to index->waiting before the loads of
+         * index->ctr.  Pairs with smp_mb() in rcu_read_unlock(),
+         * ensuring that the loads of index->ctr are sequentially consistent.
          */
         smp_mb();
 
@@ -142,8 +143,13 @@ static void wait_for_readers(void)
 void synchronize_rcu(void)
 {
     qemu_mutex_lock(&rcu_sync_lock);
-    qemu_mutex_lock(&rcu_registry_lock);
 
+    /* Write RCU-protected pointers before reading p_rcu_reader->ctr.
+     * Pairs with smp_mb() in rcu_read_lock().
+     */
+    smp_mb();
+
+    qemu_mutex_lock(&rcu_registry_lock);
     if (!QLIST_EMPTY(&registry)) {
         /* In either case, the atomic_mb_set below blocks stores that free
          * old RCU-protected pointers.