From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org,
maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, joey.gouly@arm.com,
james.morse@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org,
scott@os.amperecomputing.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
yuzenghui@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] arm64: futex: support futex with FEAT_LSUI
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 10:11:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aMvMucuo7BS2y87S@e129823.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aMq5DbqsXj6vP7Xe@e129823.arm.com>
Hi Mark,
[...]
> > > + static const u64 hi_mask = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ?
> > > + GENMASK_U64(63, 32): GENMASK_U64(31, 0);
> > > + static const u8 hi_shift = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? 32 : 0;
> > > + static const u8 lo_shift = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN) ? 0 : 32;
> > > +
> > > + uaddr_al = (u64 __user *) PTR_ALIGN_DOWN(uaddr, sizeof(u64));
> > > + if (get_user(oval64, uaddr_al))
> > > + return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > + if ((u32 __user *)uaddr_al != uaddr) {
> > > + nval64 = ((oval64 & ~hi_mask) | ((u64)newval << hi_shift));
> > > + oval64 = ((oval64 & ~hi_mask) | ((u64)oldval << hi_shift));
> > > + } else {
> > > + nval64 = ((oval64 & hi_mask) | ((u64)newval << lo_shift));
> > > + oval64 = ((oval64 & hi_mask) | ((u64)oldval << lo_shift));
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + tmp = oval64;
> > > +
> > > + if (__lsui_cmpxchg64(uaddr_al, &oval64, nval64))
> > > + return -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > + if (tmp != oval64)
> > > + return -EAGAIN;
> >
> > This means that we'll immediately return -EAGAIN upon a spurious failure
> > (where the adjacent 4 bytes have changed), whereas the LL/SC ops would
> > retry FUTEX_MAX_LOOPS before returning -EGAIN.
> >
> > I suspect we want to retry here (or in the immediate caller).
>
> Right. I've thought about it but at the time of writing,
> I return -EAGAIN immediately. Let's wait for other people's comments.
When I get step back, I found my thougt was wrong as you point out.
So, what about this?
static __always_inline int
__lsui_cmpxchg32(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 oldval, u32 newval, u32 *oval)
{
u64 __user *uaddr64;
bool futex_on_lo;
int ret = -EAGAIN, i;
u32 other, orig_other;
union {
struct futex_on_lo {
u32 val;
u32 other;
} lo_futex;
struct futex_on_hi {
u32 other;
u32 val;
} hi_futex;
u64 raw;
} oval64, orig64, nval64;
uaddr64 = (u64 __user *) PTR_ALIGN_DOWN(uaddr, sizeof(u64));
futex_on_lo = (IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)uaddr, sizeof(u64)) ==
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN));
for (i = 0; i < FUTEX_MAX_LOOPS; i++) {
if (get_user(oval64.raw, uaddr64))
return -EFAULT;
nval64.raw = oval64.raw;
if (futex_on_lo) {
oval64.lo_futex.val = oldval;
nval64.lo_futex.val = newval;
} else {
oval64.hi_futex.val = oldval;
nval64.hi_futex.val = newval;
}
orig64.raw = oval64.raw;
if (__lsui_cmpxchg64(uaddr64, &oval64.raw, nval64.raw))
return -EFAULT;
if (futex_on_lo) {
oldval = oval64.lo_futex.val;
other = oval64.lo_futex.other;
orig_other = orig64.lo_futex.other;
} else {
oldval = oval64.hi_futex.val;
other = oval64.hi_futex.other;
orig_other = orig64.hi_futex.other;
}
if (other == orig_other) {
ret = 0;
break;
}
}
if (!ret)
*oval = oldval;
return ret;
}
Unfortunately, if there was high competition on "other"
I think return -EAGAIN is the best efforts..
Am I missing something?
Thanks.
--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-18 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-17 11:08 [PATCH v8 0/5] support FEAT_LSUI and apply it on futex atomic ops Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 1/5] arm64: cpufeature: add FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 2/5] KVM: arm64: expose FEAT_LSUI to guest Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 3/5] arm64: Kconfig: Detect toolchain support for LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 4/5] arm64: futex: refactor futex atomic operation Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 11:08 ` [PATCH v8 5/5] arm64: futex: support futex with FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 12:57 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 13:04 ` Mark Rutland
2025-09-17 13:35 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-17 13:57 ` Mark Rutland
2025-09-17 14:07 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-09-18 9:11 ` Yeoreum Yun [this message]
2025-09-17 13:42 ` Yeoreum Yun
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=aMvMucuo7BS2y87S@e129823.arm.com \
--to=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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