From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: hch@infradead.org, darrick.wong@oracle.com, elver@google.com,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: fix a data race in i_size_write/i_size_read
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:23:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219052329.GP23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EDCBB5B9-DEE4-4D4B-B2F4-F63179977D6C@lca.pw>
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 12:08:40AM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2020, at 11:52 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > If aligned 64bit stores on 64bit host (note the BITS_PER_LONG ifdefs) end up
> > being split, the kernel is FUBAR anyway. Details, please - how could that
> > end up happening?
>
> My understanding is the compiler might decide to split the load into saying two 4-byte loads. Then, we might have,
>
> Load1
> Store
> Load2
>
> where the load value could be a garbage. Also, Marco (the KCSAN maintainer) who knew more of compiler than me mentioned that there is no guarantee that the store will not be split either. Thus, the WRITE_ONCE().
>
I would suggest
* if some compiler does that, ask the persons responsible for that
"optimization" which flags should be used to disable it.
* if they fail to provide such, educate them regarding the
usefulness of their idea
* if that does not help, don't use the bloody piece of garbage.
Again, is that pure theory (because I can't come up with
any reason why splitting a 32bit load would be any less legitimate
than doing the same to a 64bit one on a 64bit architecture),
or is there anything that really would pull that off?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-19 5:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-19 4:04 [PATCH] fs: fix a data race in i_size_write/i_size_read Qian Cai
2020-02-19 4:52 ` Al Viro
2020-02-19 5:08 ` Qian Cai
2020-02-19 5:23 ` Al Viro [this message]
2020-02-19 9:21 ` Marco Elver
2020-02-19 12:18 ` David Sterba
2020-02-21 4:19 ` Qian Cai
2020-02-19 12:08 ` David Sterba
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=20200219052329.GP23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.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.