linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>,
	maged michael <maged.michael@gmail.com>,
	gromer <gromer@google.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/2] membarrier: Provide register expedited private command
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:10:10 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <121420896.16597.1506093010487.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170922085959.GG10893@tardis>

----- On Sep 22, 2017, at 4:59 AM, Boqun Feng boqun.feng@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 06:13:41PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> [...]
>> +static inline void membarrier_arch_sched_in(struct task_struct *prev,
>> +		struct task_struct *next)
>> +{
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Only need the full barrier when switching between processes.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (likely(!test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(next),
>> +			TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED)
>> +				|| prev->mm == next->mm))
> 
> And we also don't need the smp_mb() if !prev->mm, because switching from
> kernel to user will have a smp_mb() implied by mmdrop()?

Right. And we also don't need it when switching from userspace to kernel
thread neither. Something like this:

static inline void membarrier_arch_sched_in(struct task_struct *prev,
                struct task_struct *next)
{
        /*
         * Only need the full barrier when switching between processes.
         * Barrier when switching from kernel to userspace is not
         * required here, given that it is implied by mmdrop(). Barrier
         * when switching from userspace to kernel is not needed after
         * store to rq->curr.
         */
        if (likely(!test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(next),
                        TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED)
                        || !prev->mm || !next->mm || prev->mm == next->mm))
                return;

        /*
         * The membarrier system call requires a full memory barrier
         * after storing to rq->curr, before going back to user-space.
         */
        smp_mb();
}

> 
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The membarrier system call requires a full memory barrier
>> +	 * after storing to rq->curr, before going back to user-space.
>> +	 */
>> +	smp_mb();
>> +}
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +static inline void membarrier_fork(struct task_struct *t,
>> +		unsigned long clone_flags)
>> +{
>> +	if (!current->mm || !t->mm)
>> +		return;
>> +	t->mm->membarrier_private_expedited =
>> +		current->mm->membarrier_private_expedited;
> 
> Have we already done the copy of ->membarrier_private_expedited in
> copy_mm()?

copy_mm() is performed without holding current->sighand->siglock, so
it appears to be racing with concurrent membarrier register cmd.
However, given that it is a single flag updated with WRITE_ONCE()
and read with READ_ONCE(), it might be OK to rely on copy_mm there.
If userspace runs registration concurrently with fork, they should
not expect the child to be specifically registered or unregistered.

So yes, I think you are right about removing this copy and relying on
copy_mm() instead. I also think we can improve membarrier_arch_fork()
on powerpc to test the current thread flag rather than using current->mm.

Which leads to those two changes:

static inline void membarrier_fork(struct task_struct *t,
                unsigned long clone_flags)
{
        /*
         * Prior copy_mm() copies the membarrier_private_expedited field
         * from current->mm to t->mm.
         */
        membarrier_arch_fork(t, clone_flags);
}

And on PowerPC:

static inline void membarrier_arch_fork(struct task_struct *t,
                unsigned long clone_flags)
{
        /*
         * Coherence of TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED against thread
         * fork is protected by siglock. membarrier_arch_fork is called
         * with siglock held.
         */
        if (test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED))
                set_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(t),
                                TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED);
}

Thanks,

Mathieu


> 
> Regards,
> Boqun
> 
>> +	membarrier_arch_fork(t, clone_flags);
>> +}
>> +static inline void membarrier_execve(struct task_struct *t)
>> +{
>> +	t->mm->membarrier_private_expedited = 0;
>> +	membarrier_arch_execve(t);
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static inline void membarrier_sched_in(struct task_struct *prev,
>> +		struct task_struct *next)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +static inline void membarrier_fork(struct task_struct *t,
>> +		unsigned long clone_flags)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +static inline void membarrier_execve(struct task_struct *t)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
> [...]

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-22 15:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-19 22:13 [RFC PATCH v3 1/2] membarrier: Provide register expedited private command Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-19 22:13 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-19 22:13 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] membarrier: selftest: Test private expedited cmd Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-19 22:13   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-22  3:22 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/2] membarrier: Provide register expedited private command Boqun Feng
2017-09-22  3:30   ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-22  5:22     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-22  8:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-22  8:56     ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-22  8:59 ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-22 15:10   ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2017-09-24 13:30     ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-24 13:30       ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-24 14:23       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-09-25 12:10         ` Boqun Feng
2017-09-25 12:25           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-25 12:42             ` 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=121420896.16597.1506093010487.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=ahh@google.com \
    --cc=avi@scylladb.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
    --cc=gromer@google.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=maged.michael@gmail.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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 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).