From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE or barriers
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 16:09:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141204000952.GY25340@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1417645821-54731-3-git-send-email-borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 11:30:14PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> ACCESS_ONCE does not work reliably on non-scalar types. For
> example gcc 4.6 and 4.7 might remove the volatile tag for such
> accesses during the SRA (scalar replacement of aggregates) step
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58145)
>
> Let's change the code to access the page table elements with
> READ_ONCE that does implicit scalar accesses.
>
> mm_find_pmd is tricky, because m68k and sparc(32bit) define pmd_t
> as array of longs. This code requires just that the pmd_present
> and pmd_trans_huge check are done on the same value, so a barrier
> is sufficent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> mm/gup.c | 2 +-
> mm/memory.c | 2 +-
> mm/rmap.c | 3 ++-
> 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> index cd62c8c..f2305de 100644
> --- a/mm/gup.c
> +++ b/mm/gup.c
> @@ -917,7 +917,7 @@ static int gup_pud_range(pgd_t *pgdp, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>
> pudp = pud_offset(pgdp, addr);
> do {
> - pud_t pud = ACCESS_ONCE(*pudp);
> + pud_t pud = READ_ONCE(*pudp);
>
> next = pud_addr_end(addr, end);
> if (pud_none(pud))
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index 3e50383..9e0c84e 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -3202,7 +3202,7 @@ static int handle_pte_fault(struct mm_struct *mm,
> pte_t entry;
> spinlock_t *ptl;
>
> - entry = ACCESS_ONCE(*pte);
> + entry = READ_ONCE(*pte);
> if (!pte_present(entry)) {
> if (pte_none(entry)) {
> if (vma->vm_ops) {
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 19886fb..1e54274 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -581,7 +581,8 @@ pmd_t *mm_find_pmd(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long address)
> * without holding anon_vma lock for write. So when looking for a
> * genuine pmde (in which to find pte), test present and !THP together.
> */
> - pmde = ACCESS_ONCE(*pmd);
> + pmde = *pmd;
> + barrier();
> if (!pmd_present(pmde) || pmd_trans_huge(pmde))
> pmd = NULL;
> out:
> --
> 1.9.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-04 0:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-03 22:30 [PATCHv4 0/9] ACCESS_ONCE and non-scalar accesses Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 1/9] kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 9:24 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 2/9] mm: replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE or barriers Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:09 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86/gup: " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 5/9] mips/gup: " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 6/9] arm64/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 7/9] arm/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 8/9] s390/kvm: REPLACE " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 9/9] kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 9:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 15:24 ` [PATCHv4 0/9] ACCESS_ONCE and non-scalar accesses Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 23:40 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20141204000952.GY25340@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.