From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] powerpc: Make sure IPI handlers see data written by IPI senders
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:33:08 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120905043308.GA10800@drongo> (raw)
We have been observing hangs, both of KVM guest vcpu tasks and more
generally, where a process that is woken doesn't properly wake up and
continue to run, but instead sticks in TASK_WAKING state. This
happens because the update of rq->wake_list in ttwu_queue_remote()
is not ordered with the update of ipi_message in
smp_muxed_ipi_message_pass(), and the reading of rq->wake_list in
scheduler_ipi() is not ordered with the reading of ipi_message in
smp_ipi_demux(). Thus it is possible for the IPI receiver not to see
the updated rq->wake_list and therefore conclude that there is nothing
for it to do.
In order to make sure that anything done before smp_send_reschedule()
is ordered before anything done in the resulting call to scheduler_ipi(),
this adds barriers in smp_muxed_message_pass() and smp_ipi_demux().
The barrier in smp_muxed_message_pass() is a full barrier to ensure that
there is a full ordering between the smp_send_reschedule() caller and
scheduler_ipi(). In smp_ipi_demux(), we use xchg() rather than
xchg_local() because xchg() includes release and acquire barriers.
Using xchg() rather than xchg_local() makes sense given that
ipi_message is not just accessed locally.
This moves the barrier between setting the message and calling the
cause_ipi() function into the individual cause_ipi implementations.
Most of them -- those that used outb, out_8 or similar -- already had
a full barrier because out_8 etc. include a sync before the MMIO
store. This adds an explicit barrier in the two remaining cases.
These changes made no measurable difference to the speed of IPIs as
measured using a simple ping-pong latency test across two CPUs on
different cores of a POWER7 machine.
The analysis of the reason why processes were not waking up properly
is due to Milton Miller.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.0+
Reported-by: Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
---
v2: Move the barrier between setting message and calling cause_ipi
into the cause_ipi functions
arch/powerpc/kernel/dbell.c | 2 ++
arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c | 11 +++++++++--
arch/powerpc/sysdev/xics/icp-hv.c | 6 +++++-
3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dbell.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/dbell.c
index 5b25c80..a892680 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dbell.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/dbell.c
@@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ void doorbell_setup_this_cpu(void)
void doorbell_cause_ipi(int cpu, unsigned long data)
{
+ /* Order previous accesses vs. msgsnd, which is treated as a store */
+ mb();
ppc_msgsnd(PPC_DBELL, 0, data);
}
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
index 0321007..8d4214a 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
@@ -198,8 +198,15 @@ void smp_muxed_ipi_message_pass(int cpu, int msg)
struct cpu_messages *info = &per_cpu(ipi_message, cpu);
char *message = (char *)&info->messages;
+ /*
+ * Order previous accesses before accesses in the IPI handler.
+ */
+ smp_mb();
message[msg] = 1;
- mb();
+ /*
+ * cause_ipi functions are required to include a full barrier
+ * before doing whatever causes the IPI.
+ */
smp_ops->cause_ipi(cpu, info->data);
}
@@ -211,7 +218,7 @@ irqreturn_t smp_ipi_demux(void)
mb(); /* order any irq clear */
do {
- all = xchg_local(&info->messages, 0);
+ all = xchg(&info->messages, 0);
#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN
if (all & (1 << (24 - 8 * PPC_MSG_CALL_FUNCTION)))
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/xics/icp-hv.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/xics/icp-hv.c
index 14469cf..df0fc58 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/xics/icp-hv.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/xics/icp-hv.c
@@ -65,7 +65,11 @@ static inline void icp_hv_set_xirr(unsigned int value)
static inline void icp_hv_set_qirr(int n_cpu , u8 value)
{
int hw_cpu = get_hard_smp_processor_id(n_cpu);
- long rc = plpar_hcall_norets(H_IPI, hw_cpu, value);
+ long rc;
+
+ /* Make sure all previous accesses are ordered before IPI sending */
+ mb();
+ rc = plpar_hcall_norets(H_IPI, hw_cpu, value);
if (rc != H_SUCCESS) {
pr_err("%s: bad return code qirr cpu=%d hw_cpu=%d mfrr=0x%x "
"returned %ld\n", __func__, n_cpu, hw_cpu, value, rc);
--
1.7.10
reply other threads:[~2012-09-05 4:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20120905043308.GA10800@drongo \
--to=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).