From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE or barriers
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 16:09:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141204000952.GY25340@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1417645821-54731-3-git-send-email-borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 11:30:14PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> ACCESS_ONCE does not work reliably on non-scalar types. For
> example gcc 4.6 and 4.7 might remove the volatile tag for such
> accesses during the SRA (scalar replacement of aggregates) step
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58145)
>
> Let's change the code to access the page table elements with
> READ_ONCE that does implicit scalar accesses.
>
> mm_find_pmd is tricky, because m68k and sparc(32bit) define pmd_t
> as array of longs. This code requires just that the pmd_present
> and pmd_trans_huge check are done on the same value, so a barrier
> is sufficent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> mm/gup.c | 2 +-
> mm/memory.c | 2 +-
> mm/rmap.c | 3 ++-
> 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> index cd62c8c..f2305de 100644
> --- a/mm/gup.c
> +++ b/mm/gup.c
> @@ -917,7 +917,7 @@ static int gup_pud_range(pgd_t *pgdp, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>
> pudp = pud_offset(pgdp, addr);
> do {
> - pud_t pud = ACCESS_ONCE(*pudp);
> + pud_t pud = READ_ONCE(*pudp);
>
> next = pud_addr_end(addr, end);
> if (pud_none(pud))
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index 3e50383..9e0c84e 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -3202,7 +3202,7 @@ static int handle_pte_fault(struct mm_struct *mm,
> pte_t entry;
> spinlock_t *ptl;
>
> - entry = ACCESS_ONCE(*pte);
> + entry = READ_ONCE(*pte);
> if (!pte_present(entry)) {
> if (pte_none(entry)) {
> if (vma->vm_ops) {
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 19886fb..1e54274 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -581,7 +581,8 @@ pmd_t *mm_find_pmd(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long address)
> * without holding anon_vma lock for write. So when looking for a
> * genuine pmde (in which to find pte), test present and !THP together.
> */
> - pmde = ACCESS_ONCE(*pmd);
> + pmde = *pmd;
> + barrier();
> if (!pmd_present(pmde) || pmd_trans_huge(pmde))
> pmd = NULL;
> out:
> --
> 1.9.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-04 0:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-03 22:30 [PATCHv4 0/9] ACCESS_ONCE and non-scalar accesses Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 1/9] kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 9:24 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 2/9] mm: replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE or barriers Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:09 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86/gup: " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 5/9] mips/gup: " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 6/9] arm64/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 7/9] arm/spinlock: Replace ACCESS_ONCE with READ_ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 8/9] s390/kvm: REPLACE " Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-03 22:30 ` [PATCH 9/9] kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 0:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 9:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 14:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-12-04 15:24 ` [PATCHv4 0/9] ACCESS_ONCE and non-scalar accesses Christian Borntraeger
2014-12-04 23:40 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20141204000952.GY25340@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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