From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com,
dhowells@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: memory barrier question
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:59:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100919215909.GG3060@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1OxQIg-0005Nw-WE@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 10:15:51PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Sep 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Give it a few years. There are reportedly already other compilers that do
> > this, which is not too surprising given that the perception of insanity
> > is limited to lockless parallel code. If you have single-threaded code,
> > such as code and data under a lock (where the data is never accessed
> > without holding that lock), then this sort of optimization is pretty safe.
> > I still don't like it, but the compiler guys would argue that this is
> > because I am one of those insane parallel-programming guys.
> >
> > Furthermore, there are other ways to get into trouble. If the code
> > continued as follows:
> >
> > LOAD inode = next.dentry->inode
> > if (inode != NULL)
> > LOAD inode->f_op
> > do_something_using_lots_of_registers();
> > LOAD inode->some_other_field
> >
> > and if the code expected ->f_op and ->some_other_field to be from the
> > same inode structure, severe disappointment could ensue. This is because
> > the compiler is within its rights to reload from next.dentry->inode,
> > especially given register pressure. In fact, the compiler would be within
> > its rights to reload from next.dentry->inode in the "LOAD inode->f_op"
> > statement. And it might well get NULL from such a reload.
>
> Except the VFS doesn't allow that. dentry->inode can go from NULL to
> non-NULL anytime but will only go from non-NULL to NULL when there are
> no possible external references to the dentry.
>
> The compiler and the CPU cannot move the "LOAD inode->some_field"
> before the "LOAD dentry->inode", because of the conditional, right?
Other than Alpha, the CPU cannot. The standard -does- permit the
compiler to guess the value of the pointer, thus effectively moving the
load prior to the conditional. At present, as far as I know, gcc does
not actually do this.
Again, please put at least an ACCESS_ONCE() in. Trivial to do now,
possibly saving much pain and headache later on.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-19 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-15 14:36 memory barrier question Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-15 19:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-09-16 11:55 ` David Howells
2010-09-16 13:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 13:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 13:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 14:30 ` David Howells
2010-09-16 15:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-16 16:06 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 16:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-16 16:56 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 17:09 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-16 17:17 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-16 17:40 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-17 21:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-09-17 23:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-19 2:47 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-09-19 15:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-19 20:15 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-19 21:59 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-09-20 0:58 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-20 1:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-20 16:01 ` Miklos Szeredi
2010-09-20 18:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-20 18:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-20 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-20 20:26 ` Michael Cree
2010-09-20 20:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-21 14:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-22 18:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-09-18 1:12 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-16 16:50 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-09-16 16:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-16 16:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-16 17:59 ` David Howells
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-09-20 10:34 George Spelvin
2010-10-29 13:23 Memory " Tetsuo Handa
2010-10-29 15:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-10-30 5:48 ` Tetsuo Handa
2010-10-30 6:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-10-30 12:40 ` Tetsuo Handa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100919215909.GG3060@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.