From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, bobby.prani@gmail.com,
pmladek@suse.cz, jack@suse.cz, mcgrof@suse.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, joe@perches.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: drop logbuf_cpu volatile qualifier
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 10:10:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141118091022.GA19318@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1415992771-9071-1-git-send-email-elder@linaro.org>
On Fri 14-11-14 13:19:31, Alex Elder wrote:
> Pranith Kumar posted a patch in which removed the "volatile"
> qualifier for the "logbuf_cpu" variable in vprintk_emit().
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/13/894
> In his patch, he used ACCESS_ONCE() for all references to
> that symbol to provide whatever protection was intended.
>
> There was some discussion that followed, and in the end
> Stephen Rostedt concluded that not only was "volatile" not
> needed, neither was it required to use ACCESS_ONCE(). I
> offered an elaborate description that concluded Stephen
> was right, and Pranith asked me to submit an alternative
> patch. And this is it.
>
> The basic reason "volatile" is not needed is that "logbuf_cpu" has
> static storage duration, and vprintk_emit() is an exported
> interface. This means that the value of logbuf_cpu must be read
> from memory the first time it is used in a particular call of
> vprintk_emit(). The variable's value is read only once in that
> function, when it's read it'll be the copy from memory (or cache).
>
> In addition, the value of "logbuf_cpu" is only ever written under
> protection of a spinlock. So the value that is read is the "real"
> value (and not an out-of-date cached one). If its value is not
> UINT_MAX, it is the current CPU's processor id, and it will have
> been last written by the running CPU.
>
> Reported-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>
> Fix-suggested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
> ---
> Note!!! I am not able to stress test this patch.
The patch looks good to me. You can add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
BTW, stress-testing this is tough. I never saw printk recursion happening
in practice - only when I screwed up something in printk code when
experimenting.
Honza
> kernel/printk/printk.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> index ced2b84..fefc8d0 100644
> --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> @@ -1627,7 +1627,7 @@ asmlinkage int vprintk_emit(int facility, int level,
> int printed_len = 0;
> bool in_sched = false;
> /* cpu currently holding logbuf_lock in this function */
> - static volatile unsigned int logbuf_cpu = UINT_MAX;
> + static unsigned int logbuf_cpu = UINT_MAX;
>
> if (level == SCHED_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL) {
> level = -1;
> --
> 1.9.1
>
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-18 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-14 19:19 [PATCH] printk: drop logbuf_cpu volatile qualifier Alex Elder
2014-11-14 19:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-11-14 19:46 ` Alex Elder
2014-11-14 19:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-11-14 20:01 ` Alex Elder
2014-11-18 9:10 ` Jan Kara [this message]
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=20141118091022.GA19318@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=elder@linaro.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.cz \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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