(In contrast, implementation of RCU is permitted only in software licensed
under either GPL or LGPL. Sorry!!!)
+In 1987, Rashid et al. described lazy TLB-flush [RichardRashid87a].
+At first glance, this has nothing to do with RCU, but nevertheless
+this paper helped inspire the update-side batching used in the later
+RCU implementation in DYNIX/ptx. In 1988, Barbara Liskov published
+a description of Argus that noted that use of out-of-date values can
+be tolerated in some situations. Thus, this paper provides some early
+theoretical justification for use of stale data.
+
In 1990, Pugh [Pugh90] noted that explicitly tracking which threads
were reading a given data structure permitted deferred free to operate
in the presence of non-terminating threads. However, this explicit
to see how much of the performance advantage reported in 1990 remains
today.
-At about this same time, Adams [Adams91] described ``chaotic relaxation'',
-where the normal barriers between successive iterations of convergent
-numerical algorithms are relaxed, so that iteration $n$ might use
-data from iteration $n-1$ or even $n-2$. This introduces error,
-which typically slows convergence and thus increases the number of
+At about this same time, Andrews [Andrews91textbook] described ``chaotic
+relaxation'', where the normal barriers between successive iterations
+of convergent numerical algorithms are relaxed, so that iteration $n$
+might use data from iteration $n-1$ or even $n-2$. This introduces
+error, which typically slows convergence and thus increases the number of
iterations required. However, this increase is sometimes more than made
up for by a reduction in the number of expensive barrier operations,
which are otherwise required to synchronize the threads at the end
In 1992, Henry (now Alexia) Massalin completed a dissertation advising
parallel programmers to defer processing when feasible to simplify
-synchronization. RCU makes extremely heavy use of this advice.
+synchronization [HMassalinPhD]. RCU makes extremely heavy use of
+this advice.
In 1993, Jacobson [Jacobson93] verbally described what is perhaps the
simplest deferred-free technique: simply waiting a fixed amount of time
systems made pervasive use of RCU in place of "existence locks", which
greatly simplifies locking hierarchies and helps avoid deadlocks.
-2001 saw the first RCU presentation involving Linux [McKenney01a]
-at OLS. The resulting abundance of RCU patches was presented the
-following year [McKenney02a], and use of RCU in dcache was first
-described that same year [Linder02a].
+The year 2000 saw an email exchange that would likely have
+led to yet another independent invention of something like RCU
+[RustyRussell2000a,RustyRussell2000b]. Instead, 2001 saw the first
+RCU presentation involving Linux [McKenney01a] at OLS. The resulting
+abundance of RCU patches was presented the following year [McKenney02a],
+and use of RCU in dcache was first described that same year [Linder02a].
Also in 2002, Michael [Michael02b,Michael02a] presented "hazard-pointer"
techniques that defer the destruction of data structures to simplify
non-blocking synchronization (wait-free synchronization, lock-free
synchronization, and obstruction-free synchronization are all examples of
-non-blocking synchronization). In particular, this technique eliminates
-locking, reduces contention, reduces memory latency for readers, and
-parallelizes pipeline stalls and memory latency for writers. However,
-these techniques still impose significant read-side overhead in the
-form of memory barriers. Researchers at Sun worked along similar lines
-in the same timeframe [HerlihyLM02]. These techniques can be thought
-of as inside-out reference counts, where the count is represented by the
-number of hazard pointers referencing a given data structure rather than
-the more conventional counter field within the data structure itself.
-The key advantage of inside-out reference counts is that they can be
-stored in immortal variables, thus allowing races between access and
-deletion to be avoided.
+non-blocking synchronization). The corresponding journal article appeared
+in 2004 [MagedMichael04a]. This technique eliminates locking, reduces
+contention, reduces memory latency for readers, and parallelizes pipeline
+stalls and memory latency for writers. However, these techniques still
+impose significant read-side overhead in the form of memory barriers.
+Researchers at Sun worked along similar lines in the same timeframe
+[HerlihyLM02]. These techniques can be thought of as inside-out reference
+counts, where the count is represented by the number of hazard pointers
+referencing a given data structure rather than the more conventional
+counter field within the data structure itself. The key advantage
+of inside-out reference counts is that they can be stored in immortal
+variables, thus allowing races between access and deletion to be avoided.
By the same token, RCU can be thought of as a "bulk reference count",
where some form of reference counter covers all reference by a given CPU
In 2003, the K42 group described how RCU could be used to create
hot-pluggable implementations of operating-system functions [Appavoo03a].
-Later that year saw a paper describing an RCU implementation of System
-V IPC [Arcangeli03], and an introduction to RCU in Linux Journal
+Later that year saw a paper describing an RCU implementation
+of System V IPC [Arcangeli03] (following up on a suggestion by
+Hugh Dickins [Dickins02a] and an implementation by Mingming Cao
+[MingmingCao2002IPCRCU]), and an introduction to RCU in Linux Journal
[McKenney03a].
2004 has seen a Linux-Journal article on use of RCU in dcache
}
}
+@phdthesis{HMassalinPhD
+,author="H. Massalin"
+,title="Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating
+System Services"
+,school="Columbia University"
+,address="New York, NY"
+,year="1992"
+,annotation={
+ Mondo optimizing compiler.
+ Wait-free stuff.
+ Good advice: defer work to avoid synchronization. See page 90
+ (PDF page 106), Section 5.4, fourth bullet point.
+}
+}
+
@unpublished{Jacobson93
,author="Van Jacobson"
,title="Avoid Read-Side Locking Via Delayed Free"
[Viewed October 18, 2004]"
}
+@conference{Michael02b
+,author="Maged M. Michael"
+,title="High Performance Dynamic Lock-Free Hash Tables and List-Based Sets"
+,Year="2002"
+,Month="August"
+,booktitle="{Proceedings of the 14\textsuperscript{th} Annual ACM
+Symposium on Parallel
+Algorithms and Architecture}"
+,pages="73-82"
+,annotation={
+Like the title says...
+}
+}
+
@Conference{Linder02a
,Author="Hanna Linder and Dipankar Sarma and Maneesh Soni"
,Title="Scalability of the Directory Entry Cache"
}
}
+@conference{Michael02a
+,author="Maged M. Michael"
+,title="Safe Memory Reclamation for Dynamic Lock-Free Objects Using Atomic
+Reads and Writes"
+,Year="2002"
+,Month="August"
+,booktitle="{Proceedings of the 21\textsuperscript{st} Annual ACM
+Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing}"
+,pages="21-30"
+,annotation={
+ Each thread keeps an array of pointers to items that it is
+ currently referencing. Sort of an inside-out garbage collection
+ mechanism, but one that requires the accessing code to explicitly
+ state its needs. Also requires read-side memory barriers on
+ most architectures.
+}
+}
+
@unpublished{Dickins02a
,author="Hugh Dickins"
,title="Use RCU for System-V IPC"
,note="private communication"
}
+@InProceedings{HerlihyLM02
+,author={Maurice Herlihy and Victor Luchangco and Mark Moir}
+,title="The Repeat Offender Problem: A Mechanism for Supporting Dynamic-Sized,
+Lock-Free Data Structures"
+,booktitle={Proceedings of 16\textsuperscript{th} International
+Symposium on Distributed Computing}
+,year=2002
+,month="October"
+,pages="339-353"
+}
+
@unpublished{Sarma02b
,Author="Dipankar Sarma"
,Title="Some dcache\_rcu benchmark numbers"
}
}
+@unpublished{MingmingCao2002IPCRCU
+,Author="Mingming Cao"
+,Title="[PATCH]updated ipc lock patch"
+,month="October"
+,year="2002"
+,note="Available:
+\url{https://lkml.org/lkml/2002/10/24/262}
+[Viewed February 15, 2014]"
+,annotation={
+ Mingming Cao's patch to introduce RCU to SysV IPC.
+}
+}
+
@unpublished{LinusTorvalds2003a
,Author="Linus Torvalds"
,Title="Re: {[PATCH]} small fixes in brlock.h"
}
}
+@article{MagedMichael04a
+,author="Maged M. Michael"
+,title="Hazard Pointers: Safe Memory Reclamation for Lock-Free Objects"
+,Year="2004"
+,Month="June"
+,journal="IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems"
+,volume="15"
+,number="6"
+,pages="491-504"
+,url="Available:
+\url{http://www.research.ibm.com/people/m/michael/ieeetpds-2004.pdf}
+[Viewed March 1, 2005]"
+,annotation={
+ New canonical hazard-pointer citation.
+}
+}
+
@phdthesis{PaulEdwardMcKenneyPhD
,author="Paul E. McKenney"
,title="Exploiting Deferred Destruction:
projects / linux-beck.git / commitdiff