Merge commit 'tip/auto-latest'

Conflicts:
	arch/x86/include/asm/socket.h
	include/linux/rcupdate.h
	kernel/fork.c

10 files changed, 1125 insertions, 38 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt b/Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt
index 9f711d2df91b..d2b85237c76e 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt
@@ -743,3 +743,80 @@ Revised:
 	RCU, realtime RCU, sleepable RCU, performance.
 "
 }
+
+@article{PaulEMcKenney2008RCUOSR
+,author="Paul E. McKenney and Jonathan Walpole"
+,title="Introducing technology into the {Linux} kernel: a case study"
+,Year="2008"
+,journal="SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev."
+,volume="42"
+,number="5"
+,pages="4--17"
+,issn="0163-5980"
+,doi={http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1400097.1400099}
+,publisher="ACM"
+,address="New York, NY, USA"
+,annotation={
+	Linux changed RCU to a far greater degree than RCU has changed Linux.
+}
+}
+
+@unpublished{PaulEMcKenney2008HierarchicalRCU
+,Author="Paul E. McKenney"
+,Title="Hierarchical {RCU}"
+,month="November"
+,day="3"
+,year="2008"
+,note="Available:
+\url{http://lwn.net/Articles/305782/}
+[Viewed November 6, 2008]"
+,annotation="
+	RCU with combining-tree-based grace-period detection,
+	permitting it to handle thousands of CPUs.
+"
+}
+
+@conference{PaulEMcKenney2009MaliciousURCU
+,Author="Paul E. McKenney"
+,Title="Using a Malicious User-Level {RCU} to Torture {RCU}-Based Algorithms"
+,Booktitle="linux.conf.au 2009"
+,month="January"
+,year="2009"
+,address="Hobart, Australia"
+,note="Available:
+\url{http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/RCU/urcutorture.2009.01.22a.pdf}
+[Viewed February 2, 2009]"
+,annotation="
+	Realtime RCU and torture-testing RCU uses.
+"
+}
+
+@unpublished{MathieuDesnoyers2009URCU
+,Author="Mathieu Desnoyers"
+,Title="[{RFC} git tree] Userspace {RCU} (urcu) for {Linux}"
+,month="February"
+,day="5"
+,year="2009"
+,note="Available:
+\url{http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/2/5/572}
+\url{git://lttng.org/userspace-rcu.git}
+[Viewed February 20, 2009]"
+,annotation="
+	Mathieu Desnoyers's user-space RCU implementation.
+	git://lttng.org/userspace-rcu.git
+"
+}
+
+@unpublished{PaulEMcKenney2009BloatWatchRCU
+,Author="Paul E. McKenney"
+,Title="{RCU}: The {Bloatwatch} Edition"
+,month="March"
+,day="17"
+,year="2009"
+,note="Available:
+\url{http://lwn.net/Articles/323929/}
+[Viewed March 20, 2009]"
+,annotation="
+	Uniprocessor assumptions allow simplified RCU implementation.
+"
+}
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/UP.txt b/Documentation/RCU/UP.txt
index aab4a9ec3931..90ec5341ee98 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/UP.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/UP.txt
@@ -2,14 +2,13 @@ RCU on Uniprocessor Systems
 
 
 A common misconception is that, on UP systems, the call_rcu() primitive
-may immediately invoke its function, and that the synchronize_rcu()
-primitive may return immediately.  The basis of this misconception
+may immediately invoke its function.  The basis of this misconception
 is that since there is only one CPU, it should not be necessary to
 wait for anything else to get done, since there are no other CPUs for
 anything else to be happening on.  Although this approach will -sort- -of-
 work a surprising amount of the time, it is a very bad idea in general.
-This document presents three examples that demonstrate exactly how bad an
-idea this is.
+This document presents three examples that demonstrate exactly how bad
+an idea this is.
 
 
 Example 1: softirq Suicide
@@ -82,11 +81,18 @@ Quick Quiz #2: What locking restriction must RCU callbacks respect?
 
 Summary
 
-Permitting call_rcu() to immediately invoke its arguments or permitting
-synchronize_rcu() to immediately return breaks RCU, even on a UP system.
-So do not do it!  Even on a UP system, the RCU infrastructure -must-
-respect grace periods, and -must- invoke callbacks from a known environment
-in which no locks are held.
+Permitting call_rcu() to immediately invoke its arguments breaks RCU,
+even on a UP system.  So do not do it!  Even on a UP system, the RCU
+infrastructure -must- respect grace periods, and -must- invoke callbacks
+from a known environment in which no locks are held.
+
+It -is- safe for synchronize_sched() and synchronize_rcu_bh() to return
+immediately on an UP system.  It is also safe for synchronize_rcu()
+to return immediately on UP systems, except when running preemptable
+RCU.
+
+Quick Quiz #3: Why can't synchronize_rcu() return immediately on
+	UP systems running preemptable RCU?
 
 
 Answer to Quick Quiz #1:
@@ -117,3 +123,13 @@ Answer to Quick Quiz #2:
 	callbacks acquire locks directly.  However, a great many RCU
 	callbacks do acquire locks -indirectly-, for example, via
 	the kfree() primitive.
+
+Answer to Quick Quiz #3:
+	Why can't synchronize_rcu() return immediately on UP systems
+	running preemptable RCU?
+
+	Because some other task might have been preempted in the middle
+	of an RCU read-side critical section.  If synchronize_rcu()
+	simply immediately returned, it would prematurely signal the
+	end of the grace period, which would come as a nasty shock to
+	that other thread when it started running again.
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
index accfe2f5247d..51525a30e8b4 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/checklist.txt
@@ -11,7 +11,10 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	structure is updated more than about 10% of the time, then
 	you should strongly consider some other approach, unless
 	detailed performance measurements show that RCU is nonetheless
-	the right tool for the job.
+	the right tool for the job.  Yes, you might think of RCU
+	as simply cutting overhead off of the readers and imposing it
+	on the writers.  That is exactly why normal uses of RCU will
+	do much more reading than updating.
 
 	Another exception is where performance is not an issue, and RCU
 	provides a simpler implementation.  An example of this situation
@@ -240,10 +243,11 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	instead need to use synchronize_irq() or synchronize_sched().
 
 12.	Any lock acquired by an RCU callback must be acquired elsewhere
-	with irq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave().  Failing to
-	disable irq on a given acquisition of that lock will result in
-	deadlock as soon as the RCU callback happens to interrupt that
-	acquisition's critical section.
+	with softirq disabled, e.g., via spin_lock_irqsave(),
+	spin_lock_bh(), etc.  Failing to disable irq on a given
+	acquisition of that lock will result in deadlock as soon as the
+	RCU callback happens to interrupt that acquisition's critical
+	section.
 
 13.	RCU callbacks can be and are executed in parallel.  In many cases,
 	the callback code simply wrappers around kfree(), so that this
@@ -310,3 +314,9 @@ over a rather long period of time, but improvements are always welcome!
 	Because these primitives only wait for pre-existing readers,
 	it is the caller's responsibility to guarantee safety to
 	any subsequent readers.
+
+16.	The various RCU read-side primitives do -not- contain memory
+	barriers.  The CPU (and in some cases, the compiler) is free
+	to reorder code into and out of RCU read-side critical sections.
+	It is the responsibility of the RCU update-side primitives to
+	deal with this.
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.txt b/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.txt
index 909602d409bb..e439a0edee22 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.txt
@@ -170,6 +170,13 @@ module invokes call_rcu() from timers, you will need to first cancel all
 the timers, and only then invoke rcu_barrier() to wait for any remaining
 RCU callbacks to complete.
 
+Of course, if you module uses call_rcu_bh(), you will need to invoke
+rcu_barrier_bh() before unloading.  Similarly, if your module uses
+call_rcu_sched(), you will need to invoke rcu_barrier_sched() before
+unloading.  If your module uses call_rcu(), call_rcu_bh(), -and-
+call_rcu_sched(), then you will need to invoke each of rcu_barrier(),
+rcu_barrier_bh(), and rcu_barrier_sched().
+
 
 Implementing rcu_barrier()
 
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/torture.txt b/Documentation/RCU/torture.txt
index a342b6e1cc10..9dba3bb90e60 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/torture.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/torture.txt
@@ -76,8 +76,10 @@ torture_type	The type of RCU to test: "rcu" for the rcu_read_lock() API,
 		"rcu_sync" for rcu_read_lock() with synchronous reclamation,
 		"rcu_bh" for the rcu_read_lock_bh() API, "rcu_bh_sync" for
 		rcu_read_lock_bh() with synchronous reclamation, "srcu" for
-		the "srcu_read_lock()" API, and "sched" for the use of
-		preempt_disable() together with synchronize_sched().
+		the "srcu_read_lock()" API, "sched" for the use of
+		preempt_disable() together with synchronize_sched(),
+		and "sched_expedited" for the use of preempt_disable()
+		with synchronize_sched_expedited().
 
 verbose		Enable debug printk()s.  Default is disabled.
 
@@ -162,6 +164,23 @@ of the "old" and "current" counters for the corresponding CPU.  The
 "idx" value maps the "old" and "current" values to the underlying array,
 and is useful for debugging.
 
+Similarly, sched_expedited RCU provides the following:
+
+	sched_expedited-torture: rtc: d0000000016c1880 ver: 1090796 tfle: 0 rta: 1090796 rtaf: 0 rtf: 1090787 rtmbe: 0 nt: 27713319
+	sched_expedited-torture: Reader Pipe:  12660320201 95875 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+	sched_expedited-torture: Reader Batch:  12660424885 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+	sched_expedited-torture: Free-Block Circulation:  1090795 1090795 1090794 1090793 1090792 1090791 1090790 1090789 1090788 1090787 0
+	state: -1 / 0:0 3:0 4:0
+
+As before, the first four lines are similar to those for RCU.
+The last line shows the task-migration state.  The first number is
+-1 if synchronize_sched_expedited() is idle, -2 if in the process of
+posting wakeups to the migration kthreads, and N when waiting on CPU N.
+Each of the colon-separated fields following the "/" is a CPU:state pair.
+Valid states are "0" for idle, "1" for waiting for quiescent state,
+"2" for passed through quiescent state, and "3" when a race with a
+CPU-hotplug event forces use of the synchronize_sched() primitive.
+
 
 USAGE
 
diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
index 96170824a717..97ded2432c59 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
@@ -785,6 +785,7 @@ RCU pointer/list traversal:
 	rcu_dereference
 	list_for_each_entry_rcu
 	hlist_for_each_entry_rcu
+	hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu
 
 	list_for_each_continue_rcu	(to be deprecated in favor of new
 					 list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu)
@@ -807,19 +808,23 @@ RCU:	Critical sections	Grace period		Barrier
 
 	rcu_read_lock		synchronize_net		rcu_barrier
 	rcu_read_unlock		synchronize_rcu
+				synchronize_rcu_expedited
 				call_rcu
 
 
 bh:	Critical sections	Grace period		Barrier
 
 	rcu_read_lock_bh	call_rcu_bh		rcu_barrier_bh
-	rcu_read_unlock_bh
+	rcu_read_unlock_bh	synchronize_rcu_bh
+				synchronize_rcu_bh_expedited
 
 
 sched:	Critical sections	Grace period		Barrier
 
-	[preempt_disable]	synchronize_sched	rcu_barrier_sched
-	[and friends]		call_rcu_sched
+	rcu_read_lock_sched	synchronize_sched	rcu_barrier_sched
+	rcu_read_unlock_sched	call_rcu_sched
+	[preempt_disable]	synchronize_sched_expedited
+	[and friends]
 
 
 SRCU:	Critical sections	Grace period		Barrier
@@ -827,6 +832,9 @@ SRCU:	Critical sections	Grace period		Barrier
 	srcu_read_lock		synchronize_srcu	N/A
 	srcu_read_unlock
 
+SRCU:	Initialization/cleanup
+	init_srcu_struct
+	cleanup_srcu_struct
 
 See the comment headers in the source code (or the docbook generated
 from them) for more information.
diff --git a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
index ed89299d5b74..8fa078af30ef 100644
--- a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
+++ b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
@@ -376,15 +376,6 @@ Who:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
 
 -----------------------------
 
-What:	obsolete generic irq defines and typedefs
-When:	2.6.30
-Why:	The defines and typedefs (hw_interrupt_type, no_irq_type, irq_desc_t)
-	have been kept around for migration reasons. After more than two years
-	it's time to remove them finally
-Who:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
-
----------------------------
-
 What:	fakephp and associated sysfs files in /sys/bus/pci/slots/
 When:	2011
 Why:	In 2.6.27, the semantics of /sys/bus/pci/slots was redefined to
@@ -440,16 +431,6 @@ Who:	Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
 
 ----------------------------
 
-What:	CONFIG_X86_OLD_MCE
-When:	2.6.32
-Why:	Remove the old legacy 32bit machine check code. This has been
-	superseded by the newer machine check code from the 64bit port,
-	but the old version has been kept around for easier testing. Note this
-	doesn't impact the old P5 and WinChip machine check handlers.
-Who:	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
-
-----------------------------
-
 What:	lock_policy_rwsem_* and unlock_policy_rwsem_* will not be
 	exported interface anymore.
 When:	2.6.33
diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
index fff9a94b3229..0eb0ffacde3a 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
@@ -2541,6 +2541,11 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file
 	trace_buf_size=nn[KMG]
 			[FTRACE] will set tracing buffer size.
 
+	trace_event=[event-list]
+			[FTRACE] Set and start specified trace events in order
+			to facilitate early boot debugging.
+			See also Documentation/trace/events.txt
+
 	trix=		[HW,OSS] MediaTrix AudioTrix Pro
 			Format:
 			<io>,<irq>,<dma>,<dma2>,<sb_io>,<sb_irq>,<sb_dma>,<mpu_io>,<mpu_irq>
diff --git a/Documentation/trace/events.txt b/Documentation/trace/events.txt
index f157d7594ea7..2bcc8d4dea29 100644
--- a/Documentation/trace/events.txt
+++ b/Documentation/trace/events.txt
@@ -83,6 +83,15 @@ When reading one of these enable files, there are four results:
  X - there is a mixture of events enabled and disabled
  ? - this file does not affect any event
 
+2.3 Boot option
+---------------
+
+In order to facilitate early boot debugging, use boot option:
+
+	trace_event=[event-list]
+
+The format of this boot option is the same as described in section 2.1.
+
 3. Defining an event-enabled tracepoint
 =======================================
 
diff --git a/Documentation/trace/ring-buffer-design.txt b/Documentation/trace/ring-buffer-design.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..5b1d23d604c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/trace/ring-buffer-design.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,955 @@
+		Lockless Ring Buffer Design
+		===========================
+
+Copyright 2009 Red Hat Inc.
+   Author:   Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
+  License:   The GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2
+               (dual licensed under the GPL v2)
+Reviewers:   Mathieu Desnoyers, Huang Ying, Hidetoshi Seto,
+	     and Frederic Weisbecker.
+
+
+Written for: 2.6.31
+
+Terminology used in this Document
+---------------------------------
+
+tail - where new writes happen in the ring buffer.
+
+head - where new reads happen in the ring buffer.
+
+producer - the task that writes into the ring buffer (same as writer)
+
+writer - same as producer
+
+consumer - the task that reads from the buffer (same as reader)
+
+reader - same as consumer.
+
+reader_page - A page outside the ring buffer used solely (for the most part)
+    by the reader.
+
+head_page - a pointer to the page that the reader will use next
+
+tail_page - a pointer to the page that will be written to next
+
+commit_page - a pointer to the page with the last finished non nested write.
+
+cmpxchg - hardware assisted atomic transaction that performs the following:
+
+   A = B iff previous A == C
+
+   R = cmpxchg(A, C, B) is saying that we replace A with B if and only if
+      current A is equal to C, and we put the old (current) A into R
+
+   R gets the previous A regardless if A is updated with B or not.
+
+   To see if the update was successful a compare of R == C may be used.
+
+The Generic Ring Buffer
+-----------------------
+
+The ring buffer can be used in either an overwrite mode or in
+producer/consumer mode.
+
+Producer/consumer mode is where the producer were to fill up the
+buffer before the consumer could free up anything, the producer
+will stop writing to the buffer. This will lose most recent events.
+
+Overwrite mode is where the produce were to fill up the buffer
+before the consumer could free up anything, the producer will
+overwrite the older data. This will lose the oldest events.
+
+No two writers can write at the same time (on the same per cpu buffer),
+but a writer may interrupt another writer, but it must finish writing
+before the previous writer may continue. This is very important to the
+algorithm. The writers act like a "stack". The way interrupts works
+enforces this behavior.
+
+
+  writer1 start
+     <preempted> writer2 start
+         <preempted> writer3 start
+                     writer3 finishes
+                 writer2 finishes
+  writer1 finishes
+
+This is very much like a writer being preempted by an interrupt and
+the interrupt doing a write as well.
+
+Readers can happen at any time. But no two readers may run at the
+same time, nor can a reader preempt/interrupt another reader. A reader
+can not preempt/interrupt a writer, but it may read/consume from the
+buffer at the same time as a writer is writing, but the reader must be
+on another processor to do so. A reader may read on its own processor
+and can be preempted by a writer.
+
+A writer can preempt a reader, but a reader can not preempt a writer.
+But a reader can read the buffer at the same time (on another processor)
+as a writer.
+
+The ring buffer is made up of a list of pages held together by a link list.
+
+At initialization a reader page is allocated for the reader that is not
+part of the ring buffer.
+
+The head_page, tail_page and commit_page are all initialized to point
+to the same page.
+
+The reader page is initialized to have its next pointer pointing to
+the head page, and its previous pointer pointing to a page before
+the head page.
+
+The reader has its own page to use. At start up time, this page is
+allocated but is not attached to the list. When the reader wants
+to read from the buffer, if its page is empty (like it is on start up)
+it will swap its page with the head_page. The old reader page will
+become part of the ring buffer and the head_page will be removed.
+The page after the inserted page (old reader_page) will become the
+new head page.
+
+Once the new page is given to the reader, the reader could do what
+it wants with it, as long as a writer has left that page.
+
+A sample of how the reader page is swapped: Note this does not
+show the head page in the buffer, it is for demonstrating a swap
+only.
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |
+  +------+
+                  +---+   +---+   +---+
+                  |   |-->|   |-->|   |
+                  |   |<--|   |<--|   |
+                  +---+   +---+   +---+
+                   ^ |             ^ |
+                   | +-------------+ |
+                   +-----------------+
+
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------------------+
+  +------+                   v
+    |             +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |             |   |-->|   |-->|   |
+    |             |   |<--|   |<--|   |<-+
+    |             +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |              ^ |             ^ |   |
+    |              | +-------------+ |   |
+    |              +-----------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------------------+
+  +------+ <---------------+ v
+    |  ^          +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |  |          |   |-->|   |-->|   |
+    |  |          |   |   |   |<--|   |<-+
+    |  |          +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |  |             |             ^ |   |
+    |  |             +-------------+ |   |
+    |  +-----------------------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+  +------+
+  |buffer|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------------------+
+  +------+ <---------------+ v
+    |  ^          +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |  |          |   |   |   |-->|   |
+    |  |  New     |   |   |   |<--|   |<-+
+    |  | Reader   +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |  |  page ----^                 |   |
+    |  |                             |   |
+    |  +-----------------------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+
+
+It is possible that the page swapped is the commit page and the tail page,
+if what is in the ring buffer is less than what is held in a buffer page.
+
+
+          reader page    commit page   tail page
+              |              |             |
+              v              |             |
+             +---+           |             |
+             |   |<----------+             |
+             |   |<------------------------+
+             |   |------+
+             +---+      |
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+This case is still valid for this algorithm.
+When the writer leaves the page, it simply goes into the ring buffer
+since the reader page still points to the next location in the ring
+buffer.
+
+
+The main pointers:
+
+  reader page - The page used solely by the reader and is not part
+                of the ring buffer (may be swapped in)
+
+  head page - the next page in the ring buffer that will be swapped
+              with the reader page.
+
+  tail page - the page where the next write will take place.
+
+  commit page - the page that last finished a write.
+
+The commit page only is updated by the outer most writer in the
+writer stack. A writer that preempts another writer will not move the
+commit page.
+
+When data is written into the ring buffer, a position is reserved
+in the ring buffer and passed back to the writer. When the writer
+is finished writing data into that position, it commits the write.
+
+Another write (or a read) may take place at anytime during this
+transaction. If another write happens it must finish before continuing
+with the previous write.
+
+
+   Write reserve:
+
+       Buffer page
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+  <--- given back to writer (current commit)
+      |reserved |
+      +---------+ <--- tail pointer
+      | empty   |
+      +---------+
+
+   Write commit:
+
+       Buffer page
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+  <--- next positon for write (current commit)
+      | empty   |
+      +---------+
+
+
+ If a write happens after the first reserve:
+
+       Buffer page
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+  <-- current commit
+      |reserved |
+      +---------+  <--- given back to second writer
+      |reserved |
+      +---------+ <--- tail pointer
+
+  After second writer commits:
+
+
+       Buffer page
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+  <--(last full commit)
+      |reserved |
+      +---------+
+      |pending  |
+      |commit   |
+      +---------+ <--- tail pointer
+
+  When the first writer commits:
+
+       Buffer page
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+
+      |written  |
+      +---------+  <--(last full commit and tail pointer)
+
+
+The commit pointer points to the last write location that was
+committed without preempting another write. When a write that
+preempted another write is committed, it only becomes a pending commit
+and will not be a full commit till all writes have been committed.
+
+The commit page points to the page that has the last full commit.
+The tail page points to the page with the last write (before
+committing).
+
+The tail page is always equal to or after the commit page. It may
+be several pages ahead. If the tail page catches up to the commit
+page then no more writes may take place (regardless of the mode
+of the ring buffer: overwrite and produce/consumer).
+
+The order of pages are:
+
+ head page
+ commit page
+ tail page
+
+Possible scenario:
+                             tail page
+  head page         commit page  |
+      |                 |        |
+      v                 v        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+There is a special case that the head page is after either the commit page
+and possibly the tail page. That is when the commit (and tail) page has been
+swapped with the reader page. This is because the head page is always
+part of the ring buffer, but the reader page is not. When ever there
+has been less than a full page that has been committed inside the ring buffer,
+and a reader swaps out a page, it will be swapping out the commit page.
+
+
+          reader page    commit page   tail page
+              |              |             |
+              v              |             |
+             +---+           |             |
+             |   |<----------+             |
+             |   |<------------------------+
+             |   |------+
+             +---+      |
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+                        ^
+                        |
+                    head page
+
+
+In this case, the head page will not move when the tail and commit
+move back into the ring buffer.
+
+The reader can not swap a page into the ring buffer if the commit page
+is still on that page. If the read meets the last commit (real commit
+not pending or reserved), then there is nothing more to read.
+The buffer is considered empty until another full commit finishes.
+
+When the tail meets the head page, if the buffer is in overwrite mode,
+the head page will be pushed ahead one. If the buffer is in producer/consumer
+mode, the write will fail.
+
+Overwrite mode:
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+                        ^
+                        |
+                    head page
+
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+                                 ^
+                                 |
+                             head page
+
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+                                 ^
+                                 |
+                             head page
+
+Note, the reader page will still point to the previous head page.
+But when a swap takes place, it will use the most recent head page.
+
+
+Making the Ring Buffer Lockless:
+--------------------------------
+
+The main idea behind the lockless algorithm is to combine the moving
+of the head_page pointer with the swapping of pages with the reader.
+State flags are placed inside the pointer to the page. To do this,
+each page must be aligned in memory by 4 bytes. This will allow the 2
+least significant bits of the address to be used as flags. Since
+they will always be zero for the address. To get the address,
+simply mask out the flags.
+
+  MASK = ~3
+
+  address & MASK
+
+Two flags will be kept by these two bits:
+
+   HEADER - the page being pointed to is a head page
+
+   UPDATE - the page being pointed to is being updated by a writer
+          and was or is about to be a head page.
+
+
+          reader page
+              |
+              v
+             +---+
+             |   |------+
+             +---+      |
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+
+The above pointer "-H->" would have the HEADER flag set. That is
+the next page is the next page to be swapped out by the reader.
+This pointer means the next page is the head page.
+
+When the tail page meets the head pointer, it will use cmpxchg to
+change the pointer to the UPDATE state:
+
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+"-U->" represents a pointer in the UPDATE state.
+
+Any access to the reader will need to take some sort of lock to serialize
+the readers. But the writers will never take a lock to write to the
+ring buffer. This means we only need to worry about a single reader,
+and writes only preempt in "stack" formation.
+
+When the reader tries to swap the page with the ring buffer, it
+will also use cmpxchg. If the flag bit in the pointer to the
+head page does not have the HEADER flag set, the compare will fail
+and the reader will need to look for the new head page and try again.
+Note, the flag UPDATE and HEADER are never set at the same time.
+
+The reader swaps the reader page as follows:
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |
+  +------+
+                  +---+    +---+    +---+
+                  |   |--->|   |--->|   |
+                  |   |<---|   |<---|   |
+                  +---+    +---+    +---+
+                   ^ |               ^ |
+                   | +---------------+ |
+                   +-----H-------------+
+
+The reader sets the reader page next pointer as HEADER to the page after
+the head page.
+
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------H-----------+
+  +------+                   v
+    |             +---+    +---+    +---+
+    |             |   |--->|   |--->|   |
+    |             |   |<---|   |<---|   |<-+
+    |             +---+    +---+    +---+  |
+    |              ^ |               ^ |   |
+    |              | +---------------+ |   |
+    |              +-----H-------------+   |
+    +--------------------------------------+
+
+It does a cmpxchg with the pointer to the previous head page to make it
+point to the reader page. Note that the new pointer does not have the HEADER
+flag set.  This action atomically moves the head page forward.
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------H-----------+
+  +------+                   v
+    |  ^          +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |  |          |   |-->|   |-->|   |
+    |  |          |   |<--|   |<--|   |<-+
+    |  |          +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |  |             |             ^ |   |
+    |  |             +-------------+ |   |
+    |  +-----------------------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+After the new head page is set, the previous pointer of the head page is
+updated to the reader page.
+
+  +------+
+  |reader|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------H-----------+
+  +------+ <---------------+ v
+    |  ^          +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |  |          |   |-->|   |-->|   |
+    |  |          |   |   |   |<--|   |<-+
+    |  |          +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |  |             |             ^ |   |
+    |  |             +-------------+ |   |
+    |  +-----------------------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+  +------+
+  |buffer|          RING BUFFER
+  |page  |-------H-----------+  <--- New head page
+  +------+ <---------------+ v
+    |  ^          +---+   +---+   +---+
+    |  |          |   |   |   |-->|   |
+    |  |  New     |   |   |   |<--|   |<-+
+    |  | Reader   +---+   +---+   +---+  |
+    |  |  page ----^                 |   |
+    |  |                             |   |
+    |  +-----------------------------+   |
+    +------------------------------------+
+
+Another important point. The page that the reader page points back to
+by its previous pointer (the one that now points to the new head page)
+never points back to the reader page. That is because the reader page is
+not part of the ring buffer. Traversing the ring buffer via the next pointers
+will always stay in the ring buffer. Traversing the ring buffer via the
+prev pointers may not.
+
+Note, the way to determine a reader page is simply by examining the previous
+pointer of the page. If the next pointer of the previous page does not
+point back to the original page, then the original page is a reader page:
+
+
+             +--------+
+             | reader |  next   +----+
+             |  page  |-------->|    |<====== (buffer page)
+             +--------+         +----+
+                 |                | ^
+                 |                v | next
+            prev |              +----+
+                 +------------->|    |
+                                +----+
+
+The way the head page moves forward:
+
+When the tail page meets the head page and the buffer is in overwrite mode
+and more writes take place, the head page must be moved forward before the
+writer may move the tail page. The way this is done is that the writer
+performs a cmpxchg to convert the pointer to the head page from the HEADER
+flag to have the UPDATE flag set. Once this is done, the reader will
+not be able to swap the head page from the buffer, nor will it be able to
+move the head page, until the writer is finished with the move.
+
+This eliminates any races that the reader can have on the writer. The reader
+must spin, and this is why the reader can not preempt the writer.
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The following page will be made into the new head page.
+
+           tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+After the new head page has been set, we can set the old head page
+pointer back to NORMAL.
+
+           tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+After the head page has been moved, the tail page may now move forward.
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+
+The above are the trivial updates. Now for the more complex scenarios.
+
+
+As stated before, if enough writes preempt the first write, the
+tail page may make it all the way around the buffer and meet the commit
+page. At this time, we must start dropping writes (usually with some kind
+of warning to the user). But what happens if the commit was still on the
+reader page? The commit page is not part of the ring buffer. The tail page
+must account for this.
+
+
+          reader page    commit page
+              |              |
+              v              |
+             +---+           |
+             |   |<----------+
+             |   |
+             |   |------+
+             +---+      |
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+               ^
+               |
+           tail page
+
+If the tail page were to simply push the head page forward, the commit when
+leaving the reader page would not be pointing to the correct page.
+
+The solution to this is to test if the commit page is on the reader page
+before pushing the head page. If it is, then it can be assumed that the
+tail page wrapped the buffer, and we must drop new writes.
+
+This is not a race condition, because the commit page can only be moved
+by the outter most writer (the writer that was preempted).
+This means that the commit will not move while a writer is moving the
+tail page. The reader can not swap the reader page if it is also being
+used as the commit page. The reader can simply check that the commit
+is off the reader page. Once the commit page leaves the reader page
+it will never go back on it unless a reader does another swap with the
+buffer page that is also the commit page.
+
+
+Nested writes
+-------------
+
+In the pushing forward of the tail page we must first push forward
+the head page if the head page is the next page. If the head page
+is not the next page, the tail page is simply updated with a cmpxchg.
+
+Only writers move the tail page. This must be done atomically to protect
+against nested writers.
+
+  temp_page = tail_page
+  next_page = temp_page->next
+  cmpxchg(tail_page, temp_page, next_page)
+
+The above will update the tail page if it is still pointing to the expected
+page. If this fails, a nested write pushed it forward, the the current write
+does not need to push it.
+
+
+           temp page
+               |
+               v
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+Nested write comes in and moves the tail page forward:
+
+                    tail page (moved by nested writer)
+            temp page   |
+               |        |
+               v        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The above would fail the cmpxchg, but since the tail page has already
+been moved forward, the writer will just try again to reserve storage
+on the new tail page.
+
+But the moving of the head page is a bit more complex.
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The write converts the head page pointer to UPDATE.
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+But if a nested writer preempts here. It will see that the next
+page is a head page, but it is also nested. It will detect that
+it is nested and will save that information. The detection is the
+fact that it sees the UPDATE flag instead of a HEADER or NORMAL
+pointer.
+
+The nested writer will set the new head page pointer.
+
+           tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+But it will not reset the update back to normal. Only the writer
+that converted a pointer from HEAD to UPDATE will convert it back
+to NORMAL.
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+After the nested writer finishes, the outer most writer will convert
+the UPDATE pointer to NORMAL.
+
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+
+It can be even more complex if several nested writes came in and moved
+the tail page ahead several pages:
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-H->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The write converts the head page pointer to UPDATE.
+
+            tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+Next writer comes in, and sees the update and sets up the new
+head page.
+
+(second writer)
+
+           tail page
+               |
+               v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The nested writer moves the tail page forward. But does not set the old
+update page to NORMAL because it is not the outer most writer.
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+Another writer preempts and sees the page after the tail page is a head page.
+It changes it from HEAD to UPDATE.
+
+(third writer)
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-U->|   |--->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The writer will move the head page forward:
+
+
+(third writer)
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-U->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+But now that the third writer did change the HEAD flag to UPDATE it
+will convert it to normal:
+
+
+(third writer)
+
+                    tail page
+                        |
+                        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+
+Then it will move the tail page, and return back to the second writer.
+
+
+(second writer)
+
+                             tail page
+                                 |
+                                 v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+
+The second writer will fail to move the tail page because it was already
+moved, so it will try again and add its data to the new tail page.
+It will return to the first writer.
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+                             tail page
+                                 |
+                                 v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+The first writer can not know atomically test if the tail page moved
+while it updates the HEAD page. It will then update the head page to
+what it thinks is the new head page.
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+                             tail page
+                                 |
+                                 v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+Since the cmpxchg returns the old value of the pointer the first writer
+will see it succeeded in updating the pointer from NORMAL to HEAD.
+But as we can see, this is not good enough. It must also check to see
+if the tail page is either where it use to be or on the next page:
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+               A        B    tail page
+               |        |        |
+               v        v        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |-H->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+If tail page != A and tail page does not equal B, then it must reset the
+pointer back to NORMAL. The fact that it only needs to worry about
+nested writers, it only needs to check this after setting the HEAD page.
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+               A        B    tail page
+               |        |        |
+               v        v        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |-U->|   |--->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+
+Now the writer can update the head page. This is also why the head page must
+remain in UPDATE and only reset by the outer most writer. This prevents
+the reader from seeing the incorrect head page.
+
+
+(first writer)
+
+               A        B    tail page
+               |        |        |
+               v        v        v
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+<---|   |--->|   |--->|   |--->|   |-H->
+--->|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---|   |<---
+    +---+    +---+    +---+    +---+
+