From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: Heinz.Egger@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Molnar, Ingo" <mingo@kernel.org>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Perf user-space ABI sequence lock memory barriers
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 22:56:24 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <238497929.19329.1391554584871.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <104831840.19303.1391553779700.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Hi,
I'm currently integrating user-space performance counters from
Perf into LTTng-UST, and I'm noticing something odd regarding
the home-made sequence lock found at:
kernel/events/core.c: perf_event_update_userpage()
++userpg->lock;
barrier();
[...]
barrier();
++userpg->lock;
This goes in pair with something like this at user-level:
do {
seq = pc->lock;
barrier();
idx = pc->index;
count = pc->offset;
if (idx)
count += rdpmc(idx - 1);
barrier();
} while (pc->lock != seq);
As we see, only compiler barrier() are protecting all this.
First question, is it possible that the update be performed
by a thread running on a different CPU than the thread reading
the info in user-space ?
I would be tempted to use a volatile semantic on all reads of the
lock field (ACCESS_ONCE()). Secondly, read sequence locks usually use a
smp_rmb() at the end of the seqcount_begin(), and at the beginning
of the seqcount_retry(). Moreover, this is usually matched
by smp_wmb() in write_seqcount begin/end().
Am I missing something special about this lock that makes these
barriers unnecessary ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-04 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <104831840.19303.1391553779700.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
2014-02-04 22:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2014-02-05 8:05 ` Perf user-space ABI sequence lock memory barriers Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-05 20:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=238497929.19329.1391554584871.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=Heinz.Egger@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.