From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, will@kernel.org
Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: kcsan: Fix kcsan test_barrier fail and panic
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:50:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ymfqn+I5szGeB5dU@lakrids> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YmfhHuPDilwR/Wgp@elver.google.com>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 02:10:06PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 08:17AM +0000, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > index fd7e8fbaeef1..18863c50e9ce 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@
> > #define wmb() do { kcsan_wmb(); __wmb(); } while (0)
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef __dma_mb
> > +#define dma_mb() do { kcsan_mb(); __dma_mb(); } while (0)
> > +#endif
> > +
>
> So it looks like arm64 is the only arch that defines dma_mb(). By adding
> it to asm-generic, we'd almost be encouraging other architectures to add
> it, which I don't know we want.
>
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt doesn't mention dma_mb() either - so
> perhaps dma_mb() doesn't belong in asm-generic/barrier.h, and you could
> only change arm64's definition of dma_mb() to add the kcsan_mb().
>
> Preferences? Maybe arch64 maintainers have more background on why arm64
> is an anomaly here.
Looking around, there's a single user:
[mark@lakrids:~/src/linux]% git grep -w dma_mb
arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h:#define dma_mb() dmb(osh)
arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h:#define __iomb() dma_mb()
[mark@lakrids:~/src/linux]% git grep -w __iomb
arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h:#define __iomb() dma_mb()
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c: __iomb();
... and that was introduced in commit:
a76a37777f2c936b ("iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Ensure queue is read after updating prod pointer")
... where it is used to ensure that prior (read and write) accesses to
memory by a CPU are ordered w.r.t. a subsequent MMIO write.
That seems like it could be a generic shape of problem (especially for
IOMMUs), even if arm64 is the only architecture with an implementation
today. From my PoV it would weem to make sense as a generic thing, and
should probably be added to Documentation/memory-barriers.txt.
Will, thoughts?
Thanks,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-26 13:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-26 8:17 [PATCH] arm64: kcsan: Fix kcsan test_barrier fail and panic Kefeng Wang
2022-04-26 12:10 ` Marco Elver
2022-04-26 12:50 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2022-04-28 10:49 ` Will Deacon
2022-04-26 15:13 ` Kefeng Wang
2022-04-26 12:42 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-26 15:39 ` Kefeng Wang
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=Ymfqn+I5szGeB5dU@lakrids \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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