From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
brauner@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] fs: sys_ringbuffer
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 01:16:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5jb9rnk.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <odohwdryb2yhzi5kzvlwv65kazbhzqyps6fzr2wukksdewukmr@gono7fdsth5d>
Kent!
On Sun, Jun 23 2024 at 18:21, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:13:36AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > + /*
>> > + * We use u32s because this type is shared between the kernel and
>> > + * userspace - ulong/size_t won't work here, we might be 32bit userland
>> > + * and 64 bit kernel, and u64 would be preferable (reduced probability
>> > + * of ABA) but not all architectures can atomically read/write to a u64;
>> > + * we need to avoid torn reads/writes.
>>
>> union rbmagic {
>> u64 __val64;
>> struct {
>> // TOOTIRED: Add big/little endian voodoo
>> u32 __val32;
>> u32 __unused;
>> };
>> };
>>
>> Plus a bunch of accessors which depend on BITS_PER_LONG, no?
>
> Not sure I follow?
>
> I know biendian machines exist, but I've never heard of both big and
> little endian being used at the same time. Nor why we'd care about
> BITS_PER_LONG? This just uses fixed size integer types.
Read your comment above. Ideally you want to use u64, right?
The problem is that you can't do this unconditionally because of 32-bit
systems which do not support 64-bit atomics.
So a binary which is compiled for 32-bit might unconditionally want the
32-bit accessors. Ditto for 32-bit kernels.
The 64bit kernel where it runs on wants to utilize u64, right?
That's fortunately a unidirectional problem as 64-bit user space cannot
run on a 32-bit kernel ever.
struct ringbuffer_ctrl {
union rbmagic head;
...
};
#ifdef __BITS_PER_LONG == 64
static __always_inline u64 read_head(struct ringbuffer_ctrl *rb)
{
return rb->head.__val64;
}
static __always_inline void write_head(struct ringbuffer_ctrl *rb, u64 val)
{
rb->head.__val64 = val;
}
#else
static __always_inline u64 read_head(struct ringbuffer_ctrl *rb)
{
return rb->head.__val32;
}
static __always_inline void write_head(struct ringbuffer_ctrl *rb, u64 val)
{
rb->head.__val32 = (u32)val;
}
#endif
A 64-bit kernel uses u64 while a 32-bit kernel uses u32. Same for user
space.
The ABA concern for 32-bit does not go away, but for 64-bit userspace
you get what you want, no?
Now why do you have to care about endianess?
union rbmagic {
u64 __val64;
struct {
u32 __val32;
u32 __unused;
};
};
works only correctly for LE. But it does not work for BE because BE
obviously requires the u32 members to be in reverse order:
union rbmagic {
u64 __val64;
struct {
u32 __unused;
u32 __val32;
};
};
That's a compile time decision. You can't run a BE binary on a LE kernel
or the other way around.
So they have to agree on the endianess, but BE has the reverse byte
order. That's why you need to have another #ifdef there.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-23 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-03 0:32 [PATCH 0/5] sys_ringbuffer Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 0:32 ` [PATCH 1/5] darray: lift from bcachefs Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 0:32 ` [PATCH 2/5] darray: Fix darray_for_each_reverse() when darray is empty Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 0:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] fs: sys_ringbuffer Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 4:16 ` kernel test robot
2024-06-03 4:38 ` kernel test robot
2024-06-23 22:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-06-23 22:21 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-23 23:16 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2024-06-24 0:27 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 0:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] ringbuffer: Test device Kent Overstreet
2024-06-03 0:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] ringbuffer: Userspace test helper Kent Overstreet
2024-06-07 1:49 ` [PATCH 0/5] sys_ringbuffer Stefan Hajnoczi
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=87a5jb9rnk.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).