From: Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com> To: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>, "Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com" <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com> Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, "Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com" <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>, "Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com" <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>, "will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "yamada.masahiro@socionext.com" <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>, "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>, "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>, "mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org> Subject: Re: Patch "asm-generic/bitops/lock.h: Rewrite using atomic_fetch_" causes kernel crash Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:46:16 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <1535640375.4465.68.camel@synopsys.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180830141713.GN24082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 16:17 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:53:17AM +0000, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote: > > I can see crashes with LLSC enabled in both SMP running on 4 cores > > and SMP running on 1 core. > > So you're running on LL/SC enabled hardware; that would make Will's > patch irrelevant (although still a good idea for the hardware that does > care about that spinlocked atomic crud). > > Does something like the below cure things? That would confirm the > suggestion that the change to __clear_bit_unlock() is the curprit. I tested it - this doesn't change anything, the problem still reproduces. I'll test it with last Will fix. > If that doesn't cure things, then we've been looking in entirely the > wrong place. > > --- > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > index 3ae021368f48..79c6978152f8 100644 > --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > @@ -57,12 +57,7 @@ static inline void clear_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr, volatile unsigned long *p) > static inline void __clear_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr, > volatile unsigned long *p) > { > - unsigned long old; > - > - p += BIT_WORD(nr); > - old = READ_ONCE(*p); > - old &= ~BIT_MASK(nr); > - atomic_long_set_release((atomic_long_t *)p, old); > + clear_bit_unlock(nr, p); > } > > /** -- Eugeniy Paltsev
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com> To: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>, "Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com" <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com> Cc: "mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com" <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>, "Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com" <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>, "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>, "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>, "yamada.masahiro@socionext.com" <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>, "will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Patch "asm-generic/bitops/lock.h: Rewrite using atomic_fetch_" causes kernel crash Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:46:16 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <1535640375.4465.68.camel@synopsys.com> (raw) Message-ID: <20180830144616.cD9QKy15lph4j95Zo3Cw5PVprQhGZx6_b5XlpQ9K2ZA@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180830141713.GN24082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 16:17 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:53:17AM +0000, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote: > > I can see crashes with LLSC enabled in both SMP running on 4 cores > > and SMP running on 1 core. > > So you're running on LL/SC enabled hardware; that would make Will's > patch irrelevant (although still a good idea for the hardware that does > care about that spinlocked atomic crud). > > Does something like the below cure things? That would confirm the > suggestion that the change to __clear_bit_unlock() is the curprit. I tested it - this doesn't change anything, the problem still reproduces. I'll test it with last Will fix. > If that doesn't cure things, then we've been looking in entirely the > wrong place. > > --- > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > index 3ae021368f48..79c6978152f8 100644 > --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h > @@ -57,12 +57,7 @@ static inline void clear_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr, volatile unsigned long *p) > static inline void __clear_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr, > volatile unsigned long *p) > { > - unsigned long old; > - > - p += BIT_WORD(nr); > - old = READ_ONCE(*p); > - old &= ~BIT_MASK(nr); > - atomic_long_set_release((atomic_long_t *)p, old); > + clear_bit_unlock(nr, p); > } > > /** -- Eugeniy Paltsev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-30 14:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-08-29 18:33 Patch "asm-generic/bitops/lock.h: Rewrite using atomic_fetch_" causes kernel crash Eugeniy Paltsev 2018-08-29 18:33 ` Eugeniy Paltsev 2018-08-29 21:16 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-29 21:16 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-30 9:35 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 9:35 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 9:44 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 9:44 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 9:51 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 9:51 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 11:53 ` Eugeniy Paltsev 2018-08-30 11:53 ` Eugeniy Paltsev 2018-08-30 13:57 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 13:57 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 14:17 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 14:17 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 14:23 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 14:23 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 14:29 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 14:29 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 14:43 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 14:43 ` Peter Zijlstra 2020-04-14 1:19 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-30 20:31 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-30 20:31 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-30 20:45 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 20:45 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-31 0:30 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 0:30 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 9:53 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-31 9:53 ` Will Deacon 2018-08-30 14:46 ` Eugeniy Paltsev [this message] 2018-08-30 14:46 ` Eugeniy Paltsev 2018-08-30 17:15 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-30 17:15 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-31 0:42 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 0:42 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 0:29 ` __clear_bit_lock to use atomic clear_bit (was Re: Patch "asm-generic/bitops/lock.h) Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 0:29 ` Vineet Gupta 2018-08-31 7:24 ` Peter Zijlstra 2018-08-31 7:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=1535640375.4465.68.camel@synopsys.com \ --to=eugeniy.paltsev@synopsys.com \ --cc=Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com \ --cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=mingo@kernel.org \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \ --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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: linkBe 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).