RTFP.txt 14 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412
  1. Read the F-ing Papers!
  2. This document describes RCU-related publications, and is followed by
  3. the corresponding bibtex entries.
  4. The first thing resembling RCU was published in 1980, when Kung and Lehman
  5. [Kung80] recommended use of a garbage collector to defer destruction
  6. of nodes in a parallel binary search tree in order to simplify its
  7. implementation. This works well in environments that have garbage
  8. collectors, but current production garbage collectors incur significant
  9. read-side overhead.
  10. In 1982, Manber and Ladner [Manber82,Manber84] recommended deferring
  11. destruction until all threads running at that time have terminated, again
  12. for a parallel binary search tree. This approach works well in systems
  13. with short-lived threads, such as the K42 research operating system.
  14. However, Linux has long-lived tasks, so more is needed.
  15. In 1986, Hennessy, Osisek, and Seigh [Hennessy89] introduced passive
  16. serialization, which is an RCU-like mechanism that relies on the presence
  17. of "quiescent states" in the VM/XA hypervisor that are guaranteed not
  18. to be referencing the data structure. However, this mechanism was not
  19. optimized for modern computer systems, which is not surprising given
  20. that these overheads were not so expensive in the mid-80s. Nonetheless,
  21. passive serialization appears to be the first deferred-destruction
  22. mechanism to be used in production. Furthermore, the relevant patent has
  23. lapsed, so this approach may be used in non-GPL software, if desired.
  24. (In contrast, use of RCU is permitted only in software licensed under
  25. GPL. Sorry!!!)
  26. In 1990, Pugh [Pugh90] noted that explicitly tracking which threads
  27. were reading a given data structure permitted deferred free to operate
  28. in the presence of non-terminating threads. However, this explicit
  29. tracking imposes significant read-side overhead, which is undesirable
  30. in read-mostly situations. This algorithm does take pains to avoid
  31. write-side contention and parallelize the other write-side overheads by
  32. providing a fine-grained locking design, however, it would be interesting
  33. to see how much of the performance advantage reported in 1990 remains
  34. in 2004.
  35. At about this same time, Adams [Adams91] described ``chaotic relaxation'',
  36. where the normal barriers between successive iterations of convergent
  37. numerical algorithms are relaxed, so that iteration $n$ might use
  38. data from iteration $n-1$ or even $n-2$. This introduces error,
  39. which typically slows convergence and thus increases the number of
  40. iterations required. However, this increase is sometimes more than made
  41. up for by a reduction in the number of expensive barrier operations,
  42. which are otherwise required to synchronize the threads at the end
  43. of each iteration. Unfortunately, chaotic relaxation requires highly
  44. structured data, such as the matrices used in scientific programs, and
  45. is thus inapplicable to most data structures in operating-system kernels.
  46. In 1993, Jacobson [Jacobson93] verbally described what is perhaps the
  47. simplest deferred-free technique: simply waiting a fixed amount of time
  48. before freeing blocks awaiting deferred free. Jacobson did not describe
  49. any write-side changes he might have made in this work using SGI's Irix
  50. kernel. Aju John published a similar technique in 1995 [AjuJohn95].
  51. This works well if there is a well-defined upper bound on the length of
  52. time that reading threads can hold references, as there might well be in
  53. hard real-time systems. However, if this time is exceeded, perhaps due
  54. to preemption, excessive interrupts, or larger-than-anticipated load,
  55. memory corruption can ensue, with no reasonable means of diagnosis.
  56. Jacobson's technique is therefore inappropriate for use in production
  57. operating-system kernels, except when such kernels can provide hard
  58. real-time response guarantees for all operations.
  59. Also in 1995, Pu et al. [Pu95a] applied a technique similar to that of Pugh's
  60. read-side-tracking to permit replugging of algorithms within a commercial
  61. Unix operating system. However, this replugging permitted only a single
  62. reader at a time. The following year, this same group of researchers
  63. extended their technique to allow for multiple readers [Cowan96a].
  64. Their approach requires memory barriers (and thus pipeline stalls),
  65. but reduces memory latency, contention, and locking overheads.
  66. 1995 also saw the first publication of DYNIX/ptx's RCU mechanism
  67. [Slingwine95], which was optimized for modern CPU architectures,
  68. and was successfully applied to a number of situations within the
  69. DYNIX/ptx kernel. The corresponding conference paper appeared in 1998
  70. [McKenney98].
  71. In 1999, the Tornado and K42 groups described their "generations"
  72. mechanism, which quite similar to RCU [Gamsa99]. These operating systems
  73. made pervasive use of RCU in place of "existence locks", which greatly
  74. simplifies locking hierarchies.
  75. 2001 saw the first RCU presentation involving Linux [McKenney01a]
  76. at OLS. The resulting abundance of RCU patches was presented the
  77. following year [McKenney02a], and use of RCU in dcache was first
  78. described that same year [Linder02a].
  79. Also in 2002, Michael [Michael02b,Michael02a] presented techniques
  80. that defer the destruction of data structures to simplify non-blocking
  81. synchronization (wait-free synchronization, lock-free synchronization,
  82. and obstruction-free synchronization are all examples of non-blocking
  83. synchronization). In particular, this technique eliminates locking,
  84. reduces contention, reduces memory latency for readers, and parallelizes
  85. pipeline stalls and memory latency for writers. However, these
  86. techniques still impose significant read-side overhead in the form of
  87. memory barriers. Researchers at Sun worked along similar lines in the
  88. same timeframe [HerlihyLM02,HerlihyLMS03].
  89. In 2003, the K42 group described how RCU could be used to create
  90. hot-pluggable implementations of operating-system functions. Later that
  91. year saw a paper describing an RCU implementation of System V IPC
  92. [Arcangeli03], and an introduction to RCU in Linux Journal [McKenney03a].
  93. 2004 has seen a Linux-Journal article on use of RCU in dcache
  94. [McKenney04a], a performance comparison of locking to RCU on several
  95. different CPUs [McKenney04b], a dissertation describing use of RCU in a
  96. number of operating-system kernels [PaulEdwardMcKenneyPhD], a paper
  97. describing how to make RCU safe for soft-realtime applications [Sarma04c],
  98. and a paper describing SELinux performance with RCU [JamesMorris04b].
  99. Bibtex Entries
  100. @article{Kung80
  101. ,author="H. T. Kung and Q. Lehman"
  102. ,title="Concurrent Maintenance of Binary Search Trees"
  103. ,Year="1980"
  104. ,Month="September"
  105. ,journal="ACM Transactions on Database Systems"
  106. ,volume="5"
  107. ,number="3"
  108. ,pages="354-382"
  109. }
  110. @techreport{Manber82
  111. ,author="Udi Manber and Richard E. Ladner"
  112. ,title="Concurrency Control in a Dynamic Search Structure"
  113. ,institution="Department of Computer Science, University of Washington"
  114. ,address="Seattle, Washington"
  115. ,year="1982"
  116. ,number="82-01-01"
  117. ,month="January"
  118. ,pages="28"
  119. }
  120. @article{Manber84
  121. ,author="Udi Manber and Richard E. Ladner"
  122. ,title="Concurrency Control in a Dynamic Search Structure"
  123. ,Year="1984"
  124. ,Month="September"
  125. ,journal="ACM Transactions on Database Systems"
  126. ,volume="9"
  127. ,number="3"
  128. ,pages="439-455"
  129. }
  130. @techreport{Hennessy89
  131. ,author="James P. Hennessy and Damian L. Osisek and Joseph W. {Seigh II}"
  132. ,title="Passive Serialization in a Multitasking Environment"
  133. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  134. ,address="Washington, DC"
  135. ,year="1989"
  136. ,number="US Patent 4,809,168 (lapsed)"
  137. ,month="February"
  138. ,pages="11"
  139. }
  140. @techreport{Pugh90
  141. ,author="William Pugh"
  142. ,title="Concurrent Maintenance of Skip Lists"
  143. ,institution="Institute of Advanced Computer Science Studies, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland"
  144. ,address="College Park, Maryland"
  145. ,year="1990"
  146. ,number="CS-TR-2222.1"
  147. ,month="June"
  148. }
  149. @Book{Adams91
  150. ,Author="Gregory R. Adams"
  151. ,title="Concurrent Programming, Principles, and Practices"
  152. ,Publisher="Benjamin Cummins"
  153. ,Year="1991"
  154. }
  155. @unpublished{Jacobson93
  156. ,author="Van Jacobson"
  157. ,title="Avoid Read-Side Locking Via Delayed Free"
  158. ,year="1993"
  159. ,month="September"
  160. ,note="Verbal discussion"
  161. }
  162. @Conference{AjuJohn95
  163. ,Author="Aju John"
  164. ,Title="Dynamic vnodes -- Design and Implementation"
  165. ,Booktitle="{USENIX Winter 1995}"
  166. ,Publisher="USENIX Association"
  167. ,Month="January"
  168. ,Year="1995"
  169. ,pages="11-23"
  170. ,Address="New Orleans, LA"
  171. }
  172. @techreport{Slingwine95
  173. ,author="John D. Slingwine and Paul E. McKenney"
  174. ,title="Apparatus and Method for Achieving Reduced Overhead Mutual
  175. Exclusion and Maintaining Coherency in a Multiprocessor System
  176. Utilizing Execution History and Thread Monitoring"
  177. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  178. ,address="Washington, DC"
  179. ,year="1995"
  180. ,number="US Patent 5,442,758 (contributed under GPL)"
  181. ,month="August"
  182. }
  183. @techreport{Slingwine97
  184. ,author="John D. Slingwine and Paul E. McKenney"
  185. ,title="Method for maintaining data coherency using thread
  186. activity summaries in a multicomputer system"
  187. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  188. ,address="Washington, DC"
  189. ,year="1997"
  190. ,number="US Patent 5,608,893 (contributed under GPL)"
  191. ,month="March"
  192. }
  193. @techreport{Slingwine98
  194. ,author="John D. Slingwine and Paul E. McKenney"
  195. ,title="Apparatus and method for achieving reduced overhead
  196. mutual exclusion and maintaining coherency in a multiprocessor
  197. system utilizing execution history and thread monitoring"
  198. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  199. ,address="Washington, DC"
  200. ,year="1998"
  201. ,number="US Patent 5,727,209 (contributed under GPL)"
  202. ,month="March"
  203. }
  204. @Conference{McKenney98
  205. ,Author="Paul E. McKenney and John D. Slingwine"
  206. ,Title="Read-Copy Update: Using Execution History to Solve Concurrency
  207. Problems"
  208. ,Booktitle="{Parallel and Distributed Computing and Systems}"
  209. ,Month="October"
  210. ,Year="1998"
  211. ,pages="509-518"
  212. ,Address="Las Vegas, NV"
  213. }
  214. @Conference{Gamsa99
  215. ,Author="Ben Gamsa and Orran Krieger and Jonathan Appavoo and Michael Stumm"
  216. ,Title="Tornado: Maximizing Locality and Concurrency in a Shared Memory
  217. Multiprocessor Operating System"
  218. ,Booktitle="{Proceedings of the 3\textsuperscript{rd} Symposium on
  219. Operating System Design and Implementation}"
  220. ,Month="February"
  221. ,Year="1999"
  222. ,pages="87-100"
  223. ,Address="New Orleans, LA"
  224. }
  225. @techreport{Slingwine01
  226. ,author="John D. Slingwine and Paul E. McKenney"
  227. ,title="Apparatus and method for achieving reduced overhead
  228. mutual exclusion and maintaining coherency in a multiprocessor
  229. system utilizing execution history and thread monitoring"
  230. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  231. ,address="Washington, DC"
  232. ,year="2001"
  233. ,number="US Patent 5,219,690 (contributed under GPL)"
  234. ,month="April"
  235. }
  236. @Conference{McKenney01a
  237. ,Author="Paul E. McKenney and Jonathan Appavoo and Andi Kleen and
  238. Orran Krieger and Rusty Russell and Dipankar Sarma and Maneesh Soni"
  239. ,Title="Read-Copy Update"
  240. ,Booktitle="{Ottawa Linux Symposium}"
  241. ,Month="July"
  242. ,Year="2001"
  243. ,note="Available:
  244. \url{http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2001/abstracts/readcopy.php}
  245. \url{http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/rclock/rclock_OLS.2001.05.01c.pdf}
  246. [Viewed June 23, 2004]"
  247. annotation="
  248. Described RCU, and presented some patches implementing and using it in
  249. the Linux kernel.
  250. "
  251. }
  252. @Conference{Linder02a
  253. ,Author="Hanna Linder and Dipankar Sarma and Maneesh Soni"
  254. ,Title="Scalability of the Directory Entry Cache"
  255. ,Booktitle="{Ottawa Linux Symposium}"
  256. ,Month="June"
  257. ,Year="2002"
  258. ,pages="289-300"
  259. }
  260. @Conference{McKenney02a
  261. ,Author="Paul E. McKenney and Dipankar Sarma and
  262. Andrea Arcangeli and Andi Kleen and Orran Krieger and Rusty Russell"
  263. ,Title="Read-Copy Update"
  264. ,Booktitle="{Ottawa Linux Symposium}"
  265. ,Month="June"
  266. ,Year="2002"
  267. ,pages="338-367"
  268. ,note="Available:
  269. \url{http://www.linux.org.uk/~ajh/ols2002_proceedings.pdf.gz}
  270. [Viewed June 23, 2004]"
  271. }
  272. @article{Appavoo03a
  273. ,author="J. Appavoo and K. Hui and C. A. N. Soules and R. W. Wisniewski and
  274. D. M. {Da Silva} and O. Krieger and M. A. Auslander and D. J. Edelsohn and
  275. B. Gamsa and G. R. Ganger and P. McKenney and M. Ostrowski and
  276. B. Rosenburg and M. Stumm and J. Xenidis"
  277. ,title="Enabling Autonomic Behavior in Systems Software With Hot Swapping"
  278. ,Year="2003"
  279. ,Month="January"
  280. ,journal="IBM Systems Journal"
  281. ,volume="42"
  282. ,number="1"
  283. ,pages="60-76"
  284. }
  285. @Conference{Arcangeli03
  286. ,Author="Andrea Arcangeli and Mingming Cao and Paul E. McKenney and
  287. Dipankar Sarma"
  288. ,Title="Using Read-Copy Update Techniques for {System V IPC} in the
  289. {Linux} 2.5 Kernel"
  290. ,Booktitle="Proceedings of the 2003 USENIX Annual Technical Conference
  291. (FREENIX Track)"
  292. ,Publisher="USENIX Association"
  293. ,year="2003"
  294. ,month="June"
  295. ,pages="297-310"
  296. }
  297. @article{McKenney03a
  298. ,author="Paul E. McKenney"
  299. ,title="Using {RCU} in the {Linux} 2.5 Kernel"
  300. ,Year="2003"
  301. ,Month="October"
  302. ,journal="Linux Journal"
  303. ,volume="1"
  304. ,number="114"
  305. ,pages="18-26"
  306. }
  307. @techreport{Friedberg03a
  308. ,author="Stuart A. Friedberg"
  309. ,title="Lock-Free Wild Card Search Data Structure and Method"
  310. ,institution="US Patent and Trademark Office"
  311. ,address="Washington, DC"
  312. ,year="2003"
  313. ,number="US Patent 6,662,184 (contributed under GPL)"
  314. ,month="December"
  315. ,pages="112"
  316. }
  317. @article{McKenney04a
  318. ,author="Paul E. McKenney and Dipankar Sarma and Maneesh Soni"
  319. ,title="Scaling dcache with {RCU}"
  320. ,Year="2004"
  321. ,Month="January"
  322. ,journal="Linux Journal"
  323. ,volume="1"
  324. ,number="118"
  325. ,pages="38-46"
  326. }
  327. @Conference{McKenney04b
  328. ,Author="Paul E. McKenney"
  329. ,Title="{RCU} vs. Locking Performance on Different {CPUs}"
  330. ,Booktitle="{linux.conf.au}"
  331. ,Month="January"
  332. ,Year="2004"
  333. ,Address="Adelaide, Australia"
  334. ,note="Available:
  335. \url{http://www.linux.org.au/conf/2004/abstracts.html#90}
  336. \url{http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/rclock/lockperf.2004.01.17a.pdf}
  337. [Viewed June 23, 2004]"
  338. }
  339. @phdthesis{PaulEdwardMcKenneyPhD
  340. ,author="Paul E. McKenney"
  341. ,title="Exploiting Deferred Destruction:
  342. An Analysis of Read-Copy-Update Techniques
  343. in Operating System Kernels"
  344. ,school="OGI School of Science and Engineering at
  345. Oregon Health and Sciences University"
  346. ,year="2004"
  347. ,note="Available:
  348. \url{http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/RCUdissertation.2004.07.14e1.pdf}
  349. [Viewed October 15, 2004]"
  350. }
  351. @Conference{Sarma04c
  352. ,Author="Dipankar Sarma and Paul E. McKenney"
  353. ,Title="Making RCU Safe for Deep Sub-Millisecond Response Realtime Applications"
  354. ,Booktitle="Proceedings of the 2004 USENIX Annual Technical Conference
  355. (FREENIX Track)"
  356. ,Publisher="USENIX Association"
  357. ,year="2004"
  358. ,month="June"
  359. ,pages="182-191"
  360. }
  361. @unpublished{JamesMorris04b
  362. ,Author="James Morris"
  363. ,Title="Recent Developments in {SELinux} Kernel Performance"
  364. ,month="December"
  365. ,year="2004"
  366. ,note="Available:
  367. \url{http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_morris/2153.html}
  368. [Viewed December 10, 2004]"
  369. }