From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org,
maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, joey.gouly@arm.com,
james.morse@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org,
scott@os.amperecomputing.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
yuzenghui@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] arm64: futex: support futex with FEAT_LSUI
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 10:11:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aMvMucuo7BS2y87S@e129823.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aMq5DbqsXj6vP7Xe@e129823.arm.com>
Hi Mark,
[...]
> > > + static const u64 hi_mask = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ?
> > > + GENMASK_U64(63, 32): GENMASK_U64(31, 0);
> > > + static const u8 hi_shift = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? 32 : 0;
> > > + static const u8 lo_shift = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? 0 : 32;
> > > +
> > > + uaddr_al = (u64 __user *) PTR_ALIGN_DOWN(uaddr, sizeof(u64));
> > > + if (get_user(oval64, uaddr_al))
> > > + return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > + if ((u32 __user *)uaddr_al != uaddr) {
> > > + nval64 = ((oval64 & ~hi_mask) | ((u64)newval << hi_shift));
> > > + oval64 = ((oval64 & ~hi_mask) | ((u64)oldval << hi_shift));
> > > + } else {
> > > + nval64 = ((oval64 & hi_mask) | ((u64)newval << lo_shift));
> > > + oval64 = ((oval64 & hi_mask) | ((u64)oldval << lo_shift));
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + tmp = oval64;
> > > +
> > > + if (__lsui_cmpxchg64(uaddr_al, &oval64, nval64))
> > > + return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > + if (tmp != oval64)
> > > + return -EAGAIN;
> >
> > This means that we'll immediately return -EAGAIN upon a spurious failure
> > (where the adjacent 4 bytes have changed), whereas the LL/SC ops would
> > retry FUTEX_MAX_LOOPS before returning -EGAIN.
> >
> > I suspect we want to retry here (or in the immediate caller).
>
> Right. I've thought about it but at the time of writing,
> I return -EAGAIN immediately. Let's wait for other people's comments.
When I get step back, I found my thougt was wrong as you point out.
So, what about this?
static __always_inline int
__lsui_cmpxchg32(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 oldval, u32 newval, u32 *oval)
{
u64 __user *uaddr64;
bool futex_on_lo;
int ret = -EAGAIN, i;
u32 other, orig_other;
union {
struct futex_on_lo {
u32 val;
u32 other;
} lo_futex;
struct futex_on_hi {
u32 other;
u32 val;
} hi_futex;
u64 raw;
} oval64, orig64, nval64;
uaddr64 = (u64 __user *) PTR_ALIGN_DOWN(uaddr, sizeof(u64));
futex_on_lo = (IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)uaddr, sizeof(u64)) ==
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN));
for (i = 0; i < FUTEX_MAX_LOOPS; i++) {
if (get_user(oval64.raw, uaddr64))
return -EFAULT;
nval64.raw = oval64.raw;
if (futex_on_lo) {
oval64.lo_futex.val = oldval;
nval64.lo_futex.val = newval;
} else {
oval64.hi_futex.val = oldval;
nval64.hi_futex.val = newval;
}
orig64.raw = oval64.raw;
if (__lsui_cmpxchg64(uaddr64, &oval64.raw, nval64.raw))
return -EFAULT;
if (futex_on_lo) {
oldval = oval64.lo_futex.val;
other = oval64.lo_futex.other;
orig_other = orig64.lo_futex.other;
} else {
oldval = oval64.hi_futex.val;
other = oval64.hi_futex.other;
orig_other = orig64.hi_futex.other;
}
if (other == orig_other) {
ret = 0;
break;
}
}
if (!ret)
*oval = oldval;
return ret;
}
Unfortunately, if there was high competition on "other"
I think return -EAGAIN is the best efforts..
Am I missing something?
Thanks.
--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-18 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-17 11:08 [PATCH v8 0/5] support FEAT_LSUI and apply it on futex atomic ops Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 1/5] arm64: cpufeature: add FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 2/5] KVM: arm64: expose FEAT_LSUI to guest Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 3/5] arm64: Kconfig: Detect toolchain support for LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 4/5] arm64: futex: refactor futex atomic operation Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 5/5] arm64: futex: support futex with FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 12:57 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 13:04 ` Mark Rutland
2025-09-17 13:35 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 13:57 ` Mark Rutland
2025-09-17 14:07 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-18 9:11 ` Yeoreum Yun [this message]
2025-09-17 13:42 ` Yeoreum Yun
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=aMvMucuo7BS2y87S@e129823.arm.com \
--to=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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.