linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
	Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>, Brian Cain <bcain@quicinc.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] bitops: define gen_test_bit() the same way as the rest of functions
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 18:15:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNOZRGW7CutQDAzWKKhYT4W_AotBFWpmgci8O4xMpDPrqw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220607155722.44040-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>

On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 18:05, Alexander Lobakin
<alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:43:49 +0200
>
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 01:49PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > > Currently, the generic test_bit() function is defined as a one-liner
> > > and in case with constant bitmaps the compiler is unable to optimize
> > > it to a constant. At the same time, gen_test_and_*_bit() are being
> > > optimized pretty good.
> > > Define gen_test_bit() the same way as they are defined.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h | 6 +++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h
> > > index 7a60adfa6e7d..202d8a3b40e1 100644
> > > --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h
> > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/generic-non-atomic.h
> > > @@ -118,7 +118,11 @@ gen___test_and_change_bit(unsigned int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> > >  static __always_inline int
> > >  gen_test_bit(unsigned int nr, const volatile unsigned long *addr)
> > >  {
> > > -   return 1UL & (addr[BIT_WORD(nr)] >> (nr & (BITS_PER_LONG-1)));
> > > +   const unsigned long *p = (const unsigned long *)addr + BIT_WORD(nr);
> > > +   unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(nr);
> > > +   unsigned long val = *p;
> > > +
> > > +   return !!(val & mask);
> >
> > Unfortunately this makes the dereference of 'addr' non-volatile, and
> > effectively weakens test_bit() to the point where I'd no longer consider
> > it atomic. Per atomic_bitops.txt, test_bit() is atomic.
> >
> > The generic version has been using a volatile access to make it atomic
> > (akin to generic READ_ONCE() casting to volatile). The volatile is also
> > the reason the compiler can't optimize much, because volatile forces a
> > real memory access.
>
> Ah-ha, I see now. Thanks for catching and explaining this!
>
> >
> > Yes, confusingly, test_bit() lives in non-atomic.h, and this had caused
> > confusion before, but the decision was made that moving it will cause
> > headaches for ppc so it was left alone:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/87a78xgu8o.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net/T/#u
> >
> > As for how to make test_bit() more compiler-optimization friendly, I'm
> > guessing that test_bit() needs some special casing where even the
> > generic arch_test_bit() is different from the gen_test_bit().
> > gen_test_bit() should probably assert that whatever it is called with
> > can actually be evaluated at compile-time so it is never accidentally
> > used otherwise.
>
> I like the idea! Will do in v2.
> I can move the generics and after, right below them, define
> 'const_*' helpers which will mostly redirect to 'generic_*', but
> for test_bit() it will be a separate function with no `volatile`
> and with an assertion that the input args are constants.

Be aware that there's already a "constant_test_bit()" in
arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h, which uses 2 versions of test_bit() if
'nr' is constant or not. I guess you can steer clear of that if you
use "const_", but they do sound similar.

> >
> > I would also propose adding a comment close to the deref that test_bit()
> > is atomic and the deref needs to remain volatile, so future people will
> > not try to do the same optimization.
>
> I think that's also the reason why it's not underscored, right?

Yes, the naming convention is that double-underscored ones are
non-atomic so that's one clue indeed. Documentation/atomic_bitops.txt
another, and unlike the other non-atomic bitops, its kernel-doc
comment also does not mention "This operation is non-atomic...".

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-07 16:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-06 11:49 [PATCH 0/6] bitops: let optimize out non-atomic bitops on compile-time constants Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 1/6] ia64, processor: fix -Wincompatible-pointer-types in ia64_get_irr() Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 2/6] bitops: always define asm-generic non-atomic bitops Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 12:44   ` Mark Rutland
2022-06-06 14:21     ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 3/6] bitops: define gen_test_bit() the same way as the rest of functions Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 16:19   ` Mark Rutland
2022-06-07 13:43   ` Marco Elver
2022-06-07 15:57     ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-07 16:15       ` Marco Elver [this message]
2022-06-07 16:28       ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 4/6] bitops: unify non-atomic bitops prototypes across architectures Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 16:25   ` Mark Rutland
2022-06-06 20:48   ` Yury Norov
2022-06-07 11:03     ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 5/6] bitops: wrap non-atomic bitops with a transparent macro Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 16:27   ` Mark Rutland
2022-06-07 10:57     ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-07 11:07       ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 11:49 ` [PATCH 6/6] bitops: let optimize out non-atomic bitops on compile-time constants Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-06 13:50 ` [PATCH 0/6] " Mark Rutland
2022-06-07 12:45 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-06-07 15:47   ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-06-08  9:55     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-06-08 13:31       ` Alexander Lobakin

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=CANpmjNOZRGW7CutQDAzWKKhYT4W_AotBFWpmgci8O4xMpDPrqw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=elver@google.com \
    --cc=alexandr.lobakin@intel.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bcain@quicinc.com \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
    --cc=yury.norov@gmail.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).