All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	stern@rowland.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 3/4] locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock().
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 16:28:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170803152820.GD20783@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170802114030.120586651@infradead.org>

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:38:40PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Since its inception, our understanding of ACQUIRE, esp. as applied to
> spinlocks, has changed somewhat. Also, I wonder if, with a simple
> change, we cannot make it provide more.
> 
> The problem with the comment is that the STORE done by spin_lock isn't
> itself ordered by the ACQUIRE, and therefore a later LOAD can pass over
> it and cross with any prior STORE, rendering the default WMB
> insufficient (pointed out by Alan).
> 
> Now, this is only really a problem on PowerPC and ARM64, both of
> which already defined smp_mb__before_spinlock() as a smp_mb().
> 
> At the same time, we can get a much stronger construct if we place
> that same barrier _inside_ the spin_lock(). In that case we upgrade
> the RCpc spinlock to an RCsc.  That would make all schedule() calls
> fully transitive against one another.
> 
> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h   |    2 ++
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h |    3 +++
>  include/linux/atomic.h              |    3 +++
>  include/linux/spinlock.h            |   36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/core.c                 |    4 ++--
>  5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -367,5 +367,7 @@ static inline int arch_read_trylock(arch
>   * smp_mb__before_spinlock() can restore the required ordering.
>   */
>  #define smp_mb__before_spinlock()	smp_mb()
> +/* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
> +#define smp_mb__after_spinlock()	smp_mb()
>  
>  #endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-03 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-02 11:38 [PATCH -v2 0/4] Getting rid of smp_mb__before_spinlock Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending() Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:00   ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-02 13:05     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:52       ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-02 14:16         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:00   ` ARC stuff (was Re: [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending()) Vineet Gupta
2017-08-02 13:00     ` Vineet Gupta
2017-08-02 13:17     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:17       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 14:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 14:15         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-03 15:27   ` [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending() Will Deacon
2017-08-11  9:45   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 2/4] overlayfs: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock() usage Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 3/4] locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-03 15:28   ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-08-03 15:43     ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 4/4] locking: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock() Peter Zijlstra

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=20170803152820.GD20783@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --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.