public inbox for kexec@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Barrier before pushing desc_ring tail: was [PATCH v2 2/3] printk: add lockless buffer
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 01:06:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bllpyzgr.fsf@vostro.fn.ogness.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200611120107.GD6581@linux-b0ei> (Petr Mladek's message of "Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:01:08 +0200")

On 2020-06-11, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
> All this relies on the fact the the full barrier is called in
> data_push_tail() and data_push_tail() is called right above.
> But there are two situations where the barrier is not called.
> It is when:
>
>   1. desc.text_blk_lpos.next already is behind data_ring->tail_lpos.
>
>      This is safe.

Yes, and I have since expanded the comment above the data_push_tail()
while loop to mention that:

	/*
	 * Loop until the tail lpos is at or beyond @lpos. This condition
	 * may already be satisfied, resulting in no full memory barrier
	 * from data_push_tail:C being performed. However, since this CPU
	 * sees the new tail lpos, any descriptor states that transitioned to
	 * the reusable state must already be visible.
	 */

>   2. desc.text_blk_lpos == INVALID_LPOS.
>
>      It seems that this is not synchronized and other CPUs might see
>      the old state.

Great catch! This could trigger the WARN_ON at desc_reserve:F and lead
to prb_reserve() unnecessarily failing.

> The question is what to do with the empty data case. I see three
> possibilities:
>
>   1. Ignore the case with empty block because it (probably) does not
>      cause real problems.

It could cause dropped messages.

>   2. Call the full barrier in data_push_tail() even when the data
>      block is empty.

This is the common case, since most records will not have dictionary
data.

>   3. Call the full barrier also in desc_push_tail() as I suggested.
>
> My opinion:
>
> I prefer 3rd solution.

Agreed. For my next version I am folding all smp_mb() and smp_wmb()
calls into their neighboring cmpxchg_relaxed(). This would apply here as
well, changing desc_push_tail:B to a full cmpxchg().

We still need the full memory barrier at data_push_tail:C. Readers rely
on it to be able to verify if their copied data is still valid:

CPU0 (writer0)        CPU1 (writer1)       CPU2 (reader)
                                           desc_read->committed
desc_make_reusable
smp_mb
data_push_tail
                      read new data tail
                      data_push_head
                      smp_mb
                      write new data
                                           read garbage new data
                                           desc_read->reusable

John Ogness

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-11 23:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-01  9:40 [PATCH v2 0/3] printk: replace ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-05-01  9:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] crash: add VMCOREINFO macro for anonymous structs John Ogness
2020-06-03 10:16   ` Petr Mladek
2020-05-01  9:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] printk: add lockless buffer John Ogness
2020-05-18 13:03   ` John Ogness
2020-05-18 17:22     ` Linus Torvalds
2020-05-19 20:34       ` John Ogness
2020-06-09  7:10   ` blk->id read race: was: " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 14:18     ` John Ogness
2020-06-10  8:42       ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-10 13:55         ` John Ogness
2020-06-09  9:31   ` redundant check in make_data_reusable(): was " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 14:48     ` John Ogness
2020-06-10  9:38       ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-10 10:24         ` John Ogness
2020-06-10 14:56           ` John Ogness
2020-06-11 19:51             ` John Ogness
2020-06-11 13:55           ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-11 20:25             ` John Ogness
2020-06-09  9:48   ` Full barrier in data_push_tail(): " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 15:03     ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 11:37   ` Barrier before pushing desc_ring tail: " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 15:56     ` John Ogness
2020-06-11 12:01       ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-11 23:06         ` John Ogness [this message]
2020-06-09 14:38   ` data_ring head_lpos and tail_lpos synchronization: " Petr Mladek
2020-06-10  7:53     ` John Ogness
2020-05-01  9:40 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] printk: use the lockless ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-05-06 14:50   ` John Ogness
2020-05-13 12:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] printk: replace ringbuffer Prarit Bhargava
2020-05-15 10:24 ` Sergey Senozhatsky

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=87bllpyzgr.fsf@vostro.fn.ogness.net \
    --to=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox