From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eventfd: document lockless access in eventfd_poll
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 23:07:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160302220746.GF4946@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1456956118-7082-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 11:01:58PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/eventfd.c b/fs/eventfd.c
> index 8d0c0df01854..dbbbe203f82b 100644
> --- a/fs/eventfd.c
> +++ b/fs/eventfd.c
> @@ -121,8 +121,46 @@ static unsigned int eventfd_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> u64 count;
>
> poll_wait(file, &ctx->wqh, wait);
> - smp_rmb();
> - count = ctx->count;
> +
> + /*
> + * All writes to ctx->count occur within ctx->wqh.lock. This read
> + * can be done outside ctx->wqh.lock because we know that poll_wait
> + * takes that lock (through add_wait_queue) if our caller will sleep.
> + *
> + * The read _can_ therefore seep into add_wait_queue's critical
> + * section, but cannot move above it! add_wait_queue's spin_lock acts
> + * as an acquire barrier and ensures that the read be ordered properly
> + * against the writes. The following CAN happen and is safe:
> + *
> + * poll write
> + * ----------------- ------------
> + * lock ctx->wqh.lock (in poll_wait)
> + * count = ctx->count
> + * __add_wait_queue
> + * unlock ctx->wqh.lock
> + * lock ctx->qwh.lock
> + * ctx->count += n
> + * if (waitqueue_active)
> + * wake_up_locked_poll
> + * unlock ctx->qwh.lock
> + * eventfd_poll returns 0
> + *
> + * but the following, which would miss a wakeup, cannot happen:
> + *
> + * poll write
> + * ----------------- ------------
> + * count = ctx->count (INVALID!)
> + * lock ctx->qwh.lock
> + * ctx->count += n
> + * **waitqueue_active is false**
> + * **no wake_up_locked_poll!**
> + * unlock ctx->qwh.lock
> + * lock ctx->wqh.lock (in poll_wait)
> + * __add_wait_queue
> + * unlock ctx->wqh.lock
> + * eventfd_poll returns 0
> + */
> + count = READ_ONCE(ctx->count);
>
> if (count > 0)
> events |= POLLIN;
Reviewed-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-02 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-02 22:01 [PATCH] eventfd: document lockless access in eventfd_poll Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-02 22:07 ` Andrea Arcangeli [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=20160302220746.GF4946@redhat.com \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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