From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 18:53:52 +0100
Subject: arc_usr_cmpxchg and preemption
In-Reply-To: <fdf30e76-f75d-9dda-26ca-ac011c41ee64@synopsys.com>
References: <1521045375.11552.27.camel@synopsys.com>
 <fdf30e76-f75d-9dda-26ca-ac011c41ee64@synopsys.com>
List-ID: <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
Message-ID: <20180314175352.GP4064@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018@09:58:19AM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:

> Well it is broken wrt the semantics the syscall is supposed to provide.
> Preemption disabling is what prevents a concurrent thread from coming in and
> modifying the same location (Imagine a variable which is being cmpxchg
> concurrently by 2 threads).
> 
> One approach is to do it the MIPS way, emulate the llsc flag - set it under
> preemption disabled section and clear it in switch_to

*shudder*... just catch the -EFAULT, force the write fault and retry.

Something like:

int sys_cmpxchg(u32 __user *user_ptr, u32 old, u32 new)
{
	u32 val;
	int ret;

again:
	ret = 0;

	preempt_disable();
	val = get_user(user_ptr);
	if (val == old)
		ret = put_user(new, user_ptr);
	preempt_enable();

	if (ret == -EFAULT) {
		struct page *page;
		ret = get_user_pages_fast((unsigned long)user_ptr, 1, 1, &page);
		if (ret < 0)
			return ret;
		put_page(page);
		goto again;
	}

	return ret;
}