From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
Julian Stecklina <jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] KVM, XEN: Fix potential race in pvclock code
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:25:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128152508.GB4308@phenom.dumpdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52E69BCE.1070508@redhat.com>
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 06:47:58PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/01/2014 10:41, Jan Beulich ha scritto:
> > One half of this doesn't apply here, due to the explicit barriers
> > that are there. The half about converting local variable accesses
> > back to memory reads (i.e. eliding the local variable), however,
> > is only a theoretical issue afaict: If a compiler really did this, I
> > think there'd be far more places where this would hurt.
>
> Perhaps. But for example seqlocks get it right.
>
> > I don't think so - this would only be an issue if the conditions used
> > | instead of ||. || implies a sequence point between evaluating the
> > left and right sides, and the standard says: "The presence of a
> > sequence point between the evaluation of expressions A and B
> > implies that every value computation and side effect associated
> > with A is sequenced before every value computation and side
> > effect associated with B."
>
> I suspect this is widely ignored by compilers if A is not
> side-effecting. The above wording would imply that
>
> x = a || b => x = (a | b) != 0
>
> (where "a" and "b" are non-volatile globals) would be an invalid
> change. The compiler would have to do:
>
> temp = a;
> barrier();
> x = (temp | b) != 0
>
> and I'm pretty sure that no compiler does it this way unless C11/C++11
> atomics are involved (at which point accesses become side-effecting).
>
> The code has changed and pvclock_get_time_values moved to
> __pvclock_read_cycles, but I think the problem remains. Another approach
> to fixing this (and one I prefer) is to do the same thing as seqlocks:
> turn off the low bit in the return value of __pvclock_read_cycles,
> and drop the || altogether. Untested patch after my name.
Is there a good test-case to confirm that this patch does not introduce
any regressions?
>
> Paolo
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pvclock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pvclock.h
> index d6b078e9fa28..5aec80adaf54 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pvclock.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pvclock.h
> @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ unsigned __pvclock_read_cycles(const struct pvclock_vcpu_time_info *src,
> cycle_t ret, offset;
> u8 ret_flags;
>
> - version = src->version;
> + version = src->version & ~1;
> /* Note: emulated platforms which do not advertise SSE2 support
> * result in kvmclock not using the necessary RDTSC barriers.
> * Without barriers, it is possible that RDTSC instruction reads from
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pvclock.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pvclock.c
> index 2f355d229a58..a5052a87d55e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pvclock.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pvclock.c
> @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ u8 pvclock_read_flags(struct pvclock_vcpu_time_info *src)
>
> do {
> version = __pvclock_read_cycles(src, &ret, &flags);
> - } while ((src->version & 1) || version != src->version);
> + } while (version != src->version);
>
> return flags & valid_flags;
> }
> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ cycle_t pvclock_clocksource_read(struct pvclock_vcpu_time_info *src)
>
> do {
> version = __pvclock_read_cycles(src, &ret, &flags);
> - } while ((src->version & 1) || version != src->version);
> + } while (version != src->version);
>
> if (unlikely((flags & PVCLOCK_GUEST_STOPPED) != 0)) {
> src->flags &= ~PVCLOCK_GUEST_STOPPED;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c b/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> index eb5d7a56f8d4..f09b09bcb515 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> @@ -117,7 +117,6 @@ static notrace cycle_t vread_pvclock(int *mode)
> */
> cpu1 = __getcpu() & VGETCPU_CPU_MASK;
> } while (unlikely(cpu != cpu1 ||
> - (pvti->pvti.version & 1) ||
> pvti->pvti.version != version));
>
> if (unlikely(!(flags & PVCLOCK_TSC_STABLE_BIT)))
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-28 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-16 14:13 [PATCH] KVM, XEN: Fix potential race in pvclock code Julian Stecklina
2014-01-16 15:04 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2014-01-16 16:04 ` Julian Stecklina
2014-01-17 9:41 ` Jan Beulich
2014-01-17 9:50 ` Julian Stecklina
2014-01-27 17:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-01-28 15:25 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2014-01-24 18:08 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-01-27 12:33 ` Julian Stecklina
2014-01-28 15:16 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-01-28 16:06 ` Julian Stecklina
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=20140128152508.GB4308@phenom.dumpdata.com \
--to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).