public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
	oleg@redhat.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	stern@rowland.harvard.edu, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] locking: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock()
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 18:15:05 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170607162013.855012016@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20170607161501.819948352@infradead.org

[-- Attachment #1: peterz-remove-smp_mb__before_spinlock.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Now that there are no users of smp_mb__before_spinlock() left, remove
it entirely.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
 Documentation/memory-barriers.txt                    |    5 ---
 Documentation/translations/ko_KR/memory-barriers.txt |    5 ---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h                    |    9 ------
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h                   |    2 -
 fs/userfaultfd.c                                     |   25 ++++++++-----------
 include/linux/spinlock.h                             |   13 ---------
 6 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)

--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1982,10 +1982,7 @@ In all cases there are variants on "ACQU
      ACQUIRE operation has completed.
 
      Memory operations issued before the ACQUIRE may be completed after
-     the ACQUIRE operation has completed.  An smp_mb__before_spinlock(),
-     combined with a following ACQUIRE, orders prior stores against
-     subsequent loads and stores.  Note that this is weaker than smp_mb()!
-     The smp_mb__before_spinlock() primitive is free on many architectures.
+     the ACQUIRE operation has completed.
 
  (2) RELEASE operation implication:
 
--- a/Documentation/translations/ko_KR/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/translations/ko_KR/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1956,10 +1956,7 @@ MMIO 쓰기 배리어
      뒤에 완료됩니다.
 
      ACQUIRE 앞에서 요청된 메모리 오퍼레이션은 ACQUIRE 오퍼레이션이 완료된 후에
-     완료될 수 있습니다.  smp_mb__before_spinlock() 뒤에 ACQUIRE 가 실행되는
-     코드 블록은 블록 앞의 스토어를 블록 뒤의 로드와 스토어에 대해 순서
-     맞춥니다.  이건 smp_mb() 보다 완화된 것임을 기억하세요!  많은 아키텍쳐에서
-     smp_mb__before_spinlock() 은 사실 아무일도 하지 않습니다.
+     완료될 수 있습니다.
 
  (2) RELEASE 오퍼레이션의 영향:
 
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
@@ -358,15 +358,6 @@ static inline int arch_read_trylock(arch
 #define arch_read_relax(lock)	cpu_relax()
 #define arch_write_relax(lock)	cpu_relax()
 
-/*
- * Accesses appearing in program order before a spin_lock() operation
- * can be reordered with accesses inside the critical section, by virtue
- * of arch_spin_lock being constructed using acquire semantics.
- *
- * In cases where this is problematic (e.g. try_to_wake_up), an
- * smp_mb__before_spinlock() can restore the required ordering.
- */
-#define smp_mb__before_spinlock()	smp_mb()
 /* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
 #define smp_mb__after_spinlock()	smp_mb()
 
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -74,8 +74,6 @@ do {									\
 	___p1;								\
 })
 
-#define smp_mb__before_spinlock()   smp_mb()
-
 #include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
 
 #endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_BARRIER_H */
--- a/fs/userfaultfd.c
+++ b/fs/userfaultfd.c
@@ -109,27 +109,24 @@ static int userfaultfd_wake_function(wai
 		goto out;
 	WRITE_ONCE(uwq->waken, true);
 	/*
-	 * The implicit smp_mb__before_spinlock in try_to_wake_up()
-	 * renders uwq->waken visible to other CPUs before the task is
-	 * waken.
+	 * The Program-Order guarantees provided by the scheduler
+	 * ensure uwq->waken is visible before the task is woken.
 	 */
 	ret = wake_up_state(wq->private, mode);
-	if (ret)
+	if (ret) {
 		/*
 		 * Wake only once, autoremove behavior.
 		 *
-		 * After the effect of list_del_init is visible to the
-		 * other CPUs, the waitqueue may disappear from under
-		 * us, see the !list_empty_careful() in
-		 * handle_userfault(). try_to_wake_up() has an
-		 * implicit smp_mb__before_spinlock, and the
-		 * wq->private is read before calling the extern
-		 * function "wake_up_state" (which in turns calls
-		 * try_to_wake_up). While the spin_lock;spin_unlock;
-		 * wouldn't be enough, the smp_mb__before_spinlock is
-		 * enough to avoid an explicit smp_mb() here.
+		 * After the effect of list_del_init is visible to the other
+		 * CPUs, the waitqueue may disappear from under us, see the
+		 * !list_empty_careful() in handle_userfault().
+		 *
+		 * try_to_wake_up() has an implicit smp_mb(), and the
+		 * wq->private is read before calling the extern function
+		 * "wake_up_state" (which in turns calls try_to_wake_up).
 		 */
 		list_del_init(&wq->entry);
+	}
 out:
 	return ret;
 }
--- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
+++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
@@ -118,19 +118,6 @@ do {								\
 #endif
 
 /*
- * Despite its name it doesn't necessarily has to be a full barrier.
- * It should only guarantee that a STORE before the critical section
- * can not be reordered with LOADs and STOREs inside this section.
- * spin_lock() is the one-way barrier, this LOAD can not escape out
- * of the region. So the default implementation simply ensures that
- * a STORE can not move into the critical section, smp_wmb() should
- * serialize it with another STORE done by spin_lock().
- */
-#ifndef smp_mb__before_spinlock
-#define smp_mb__before_spinlock()	smp_wmb()
-#endif
-
-/*
  * This barrier must provide two things:
  *
  *   - it must guarantee a STORE before the spin_lock() is ordered against a

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-07 16:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-07 16:15 [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Getting rid of smp_mb__before_spinlock Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-07 16:15 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending() Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-09 14:45   ` Will Deacon
2017-06-09 18:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-28 17:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-01 10:31       ` Will Deacon
2017-08-01 12:02         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-08-01 12:14           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-01 16:39             ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-01 16:44               ` Will Deacon
2017-08-01 16:48                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-01 22:59                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02  1:23                     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-08-02  8:11                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02  8:15                         ` Will Deacon
2017-08-02  8:43                           ` Will Deacon
2017-08-02  8:51                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02  9:02                               ` Will Deacon
2017-08-02 22:54                                 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-08-02  8:45                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02  9:02                             ` Will Deacon
2017-08-02  9:18                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:57                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-08-02 15:46                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02  0:17                   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-08-01 22:42             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-06-07 16:15 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-07 16:15 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] overlayfs: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock() usage Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-07 16:15 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-06-07 16:15 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] powerpc: Remove SYNC from _switch Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-08  0:32   ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-06-08  6:54     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-08  7:29       ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-06-08  7:57         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-08  8:21           ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-06-08  9:54           ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-08 10:00             ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-06-08 12:45               ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-08 13:18                 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-06-08 13:47                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-06-09 14:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Getting rid of smp_mb__before_spinlock Will Deacon

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=20170607162013.855012016@infradead.org \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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