From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, kvm@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, oleg@redhat.com,
dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 20:57:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171205204928-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171205183946.GP3165@worktop.lehotels.local>
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:39:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:31:20PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> > Apropos, READ_ONCE is now asymmetrical with WRITE_ONCE.
> >
> > I can read a pointer with READ_ONCE and be sure the value
> > is sane, but only if I also remember to put in smp_wmb before
> > WRITE_ONCE. Otherwise the pointer is ok but no guarantees
> > about the data pointed to.
>
> That was already the case on everything except Alpha. And the canonical
> match do the data dependency is store_release, not wmb.
Oh, interesting
static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
{
switch (size) {
case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
default:
barrier();
__builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
barrier();
}
}
#define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) \
({ \
union { typeof(x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u = \
{ .__val = (__force typeof(x)) (val) }; \
__write_once_size(&(x), __u.__c, sizeof(x)); \
__u.__val; \
})
I don't see WRITE_ONCE inserting any barriers, release or
write.
So it seems that on an architecture where writes can be reordered,
if I do
*pointer = 0xa;
WRITE_ONCE(array[x], pointer);
array write might bypass the pointer write,
and readers will read a stale value.
--
MST
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org,
dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
oleg@redhat.com, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 20:57:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171205204928-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171205183946.GP3165@worktop.lehotels.local>
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 07:39:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:31:20PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> > Apropos, READ_ONCE is now asymmetrical with WRITE_ONCE.
> >
> > I can read a pointer with READ_ONCE and be sure the value
> > is sane, but only if I also remember to put in smp_wmb before
> > WRITE_ONCE. Otherwise the pointer is ok but no guarantees
> > about the data pointed to.
>
> That was already the case on everything except Alpha. And the canonical
> match do the data dependency is store_release, not wmb.
Oh, interesting
static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
{
switch (size) {
case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
default:
barrier();
__builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
barrier();
}
}
#define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) \
({ \
union { typeof(x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u = \
{ .__val = (__force typeof(x)) (val) }; \
__write_once_size(&(x), __u.__c, sizeof(x)); \
__u.__val; \
})
I don't see WRITE_ONCE inserting any barriers, release or
write.
So it seems that on an architecture where writes can be reordered,
if I do
*pointer = 0xa;
WRITE_ONCE(array[x], pointer);
array write might bypass the pointer write,
and readers will read a stale value.
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-05 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-01 19:50 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/21] De-emphasize {smp_,}read_barrier_depends Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:50 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 01/21] doc: READ_ONCE() now implies smp_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 15:38 ` David Howells
2017-12-04 18:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 21:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-04 22:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 22:39 ` David Howells
2017-12-04 22:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 19:50 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/21] mn10300: READ_ONCE() now implies smp_read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:50 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/21] drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed: Fix __qed_spq_block() ordering Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:50 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/21] fs/dcache: Use release-acquire for name/length update Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/21] percpu: READ_ONCE() now implies smp_read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/21] rcu: Adjust read-side accessor comments for READ_ONCE() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/21] rtnetlink: Update now-misleading smp_read_barrier_depends() comment Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 08/21] seqlock: Remove now-redundant smp_read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 09/21] uprobes: " Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/21] locking: Remove smp_read_barrier_depends() from queued_spin_lock_slowpath() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/21] tracepoint: Remove smp_read_barrier_depends() from comment Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 12/21] lib/assoc_array: Remove smp_read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/21] mm/ksm: Remove now-redundant smp_read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/21] netfilter: " Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/21] keyring: " Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 0:59 ` James Morris
2017-12-04 0:59 ` James Morris
2017-12-04 0:59 ` James Morris
2017-12-04 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 16/21] drivers/infiniband: " Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <1512157876-24665-16-git-send-email-paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2017-12-02 0:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-12-02 0:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-12-02 1:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <20171202010851.GL7829-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2017-12-05 15:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-12-05 15:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-12-05 20:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 17/21] doc: De-emphasize smp_read_barrier_depends Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 18/21] genetlink: Remove smp_read_barrier_depends() from comment Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 19/21] netlink: " Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 20/21] checkpatch: Add warnings for {smp_,}read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 20:14 ` Joe Perches
2017-12-01 21:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-02 4:45 ` Joe Perches
2017-12-04 19:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-04 19:12 ` Joe Perches
2017-12-01 19:51 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends() Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-01 19:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 18:31 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 18:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 18:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 18:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2017-12-05 18:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 19:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 19:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 19:24 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 19:24 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 19:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 19:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 19:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 19:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 19:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 19:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 20:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 21:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 20:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 20:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 21:24 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 21:43 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:43 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 22:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 22:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 22:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 22:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 21:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 21:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 22:09 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 23:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 23:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 22:09 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 21:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 21:24 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-12-05 20:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-12-05 19:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 19:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-05 18:31 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20171205204928-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=virtualization@lists.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.