From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 13/18] arm64: cmpxchg: avoid memory barrier on comparison failure
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 16:58:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150713155830.GL2632@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150713153226.GA19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 04:32:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 03:52:25PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > That's an interesting case, and I think it's also broken on Alpha and Power
> > (which don't use this code). It's fun actually, because a failed cmpxchg
> > on those architectures gives you the barrier *before* the cmpxchg, but not
> > the one afterwards so it doesn't actually help here.
> >
> > So there's three options afaict:
> >
> > (1) Document failed cmpxchg as having ACQUIRE semantics, and change this
> > patch (and propose changes for Alpha and Power).
> >
> > -or-
> >
> > (2) Change pv_unhash to use fake dependency ordering across the hash.
> >
> > -or-
> >
> > (3) Put down an smp_rmb() between the cmpxchg and pv_unhash
> >
> > The first two sound horrible, so I'd err towards 3, particularly as this
> > is x86-only code atm and I don't think it will have an effect there.
>
> Right, I would definitely go for 3, but it does show there is code out
> there :/
Yeah... but I think it's rare enough that I'd be willing to call it a bug
and fix it up. Especially as the code in question is both (a) new and (b)
only built for x86 atm (which doesn't have any of these issues).
FWIW, patch below. A future change would be making the cmpxchg a
cmpxchg_release, which looks good in the unlock path and makes the need
for the smp_rmb more obvious imo.
Anyway, one step at a time.
Will
--->8
commit e24f911487db52898b7f0567a9701e93d3c3f13a
Author: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Date: Mon Jul 13 16:46:59 2015 +0100
locking/pvqspinlock: order pv_unhash after cmpxchg on unlock slowpath
When we unlock in __pv_queued_spin_unlock, a failed cmpxchg on the lock
value indicates that we need to take the slow-path and unhash the
corresponding node blocked on the lock.
Since a failed cmpxchg does not provide any memory-ordering guarantees,
it is possible that the node data could be read before the cmpxchg on
weakly-ordered architectures and therefore return a stale value, leading
to hash corruption and/or a BUG().
This patch adds an smb_rmb() following the failed cmpxchg operation, so
that the unhashing is ordered after the lock has been checked.
Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
index 04ab18151cc8..f216200dea3e 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
@@ -296,6 +296,13 @@ __visible void __pv_queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock)
return;
/*
+ * A failed cmpxchg doesn't provide any memory-ordering guarantees,
+ * so we need a barrier to order the read of the node data in
+ * pv_unhash *after* we've read the lock being _Q_SLOW_VAL.
+ */
+ smp_rmb();
+
+ /*
* Since the above failed to release, this must be the SLOW path.
* Therefore start by looking up the blocked node and unhashing it.
*/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-13 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-13 9:25 [PATCH 00/18] arm64: support for 8.1 LSE atomic instructions Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 01/18] arm64: cpufeature.h: add missing #include of kernel.h Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 02/18] arm64: atomics: move ll/sc atomics into separate header file Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 03/18] arm64: elf: advertise 8.1 atomic instructions as new hwcap Will Deacon
2015-07-17 13:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-17 13:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 04/18] arm64: alternatives: add cpu feature for lse atomics Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 05/18] arm64: introduce CONFIG_ARM64_LSE_ATOMICS as fallback to ll/sc atomics Will Deacon
2015-07-17 16:32 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-17 17:25 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 06/18] arm64: atomics: patch in lse instructions when supported by the CPU Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 07/18] arm64: locks: " Will Deacon
2015-07-21 16:53 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-21 17:29 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-23 13:39 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-23 14:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 08/18] arm64: bitops: " Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 09/18] arm64: xchg: " Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 10/18] arm64: cmpxchg: " Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 11/18] arm64: cmpxchg_dbl: " Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 12/18] arm64: cmpxchg: avoid "cc" clobber in ll/sc routines Will Deacon
2015-07-21 17:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-21 17:32 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 13/18] arm64: cmpxchg: avoid memory barrier on comparison failure Will Deacon
2015-07-13 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-13 11:22 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-13 13:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-13 14:52 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-13 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-13 15:58 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 14/18] arm64: atomics: tidy up common atomic{,64}_* macros Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 15/18] arm64: atomics: prefetch the destination word for write prior to stxr Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 16/18] arm64: atomics: implement atomic{, 64}_cmpxchg using cmpxchg Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 17/18] arm64: atomic64_dec_if_positive: fix incorrect branch condition Will Deacon
2015-07-13 9:25 ` [PATCH 18/18] arm64: kconfig: select HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL Will Deacon
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=20150713155830.GL2632@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).