Re: [PATCH v5] add barriers to buffer functions

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Sun, Aug 07, 2022 at 07:37:22AM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> @@ -135,6 +133,49 @@ BUFFER_FNS(Meta, meta)
>  BUFFER_FNS(Prio, prio)
>  BUFFER_FNS(Defer_Completion, defer_completion)
>  
> +static __always_inline void set_buffer_uptodate(struct buffer_head *bh)
> +{
> +	/*
> +	 * make it consistent with folio_mark_uptodate
> +	 * pairs with smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep in buffer_uptodate
> +	 */
> +	smp_wmb();
> +	set_bit(BH_Uptodate, &bh->b_state);
> +}
> +
> +static __always_inline void clear_buffer_uptodate(struct buffer_head *bh)
> +{
> +	clear_bit(BH_Uptodate, &bh->b_state);
> +}
> +
> +static __always_inline int buffer_uptodate(const struct buffer_head *bh)
> +{
> +	bool ret = test_bit(BH_Uptodate, &bh->b_state);
> +	/*
> +	 * make it consistent with folio_test_uptodate
> +	 * pairs with smp_wmb in set_buffer_uptodate
> +	 */
> +	if (ret)
> +		smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
> +	return ret;
> +}

This all works for me.  While we have the experts paying attention,
would it be better to do

	return smp_load_acquire(&bh->b_state) & (1L << BH_Uptodate) > 0;

> +static __always_inline void set_buffer_locked(struct buffer_head *bh)
> +{
> +	set_bit(BH_Lock, &bh->b_state);
> +}
> +
> +static __always_inline int buffer_locked(const struct buffer_head *bh)
> +{
> +	bool ret = test_bit(BH_Lock, &bh->b_state);
> +	/*
> +	 * pairs with smp_mb__after_atomic in unlock_buffer
> +	 */
> +	if (!ret)
> +		smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
> +	return ret;
> +}

Are there places that think that lock/unlock buffer implies a memory
barrier?