public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	stern@rowland.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 3/4] locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock().
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 16:28:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170803152820.GD20783@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170802114030.120586651@infradead.org>

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:38:40PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Since its inception, our understanding of ACQUIRE, esp. as applied to
> spinlocks, has changed somewhat. Also, I wonder if, with a simple
> change, we cannot make it provide more.
> 
> The problem with the comment is that the STORE done by spin_lock isn't
> itself ordered by the ACQUIRE, and therefore a later LOAD can pass over
> it and cross with any prior STORE, rendering the default WMB
> insufficient (pointed out by Alan).
> 
> Now, this is only really a problem on PowerPC and ARM64, both of
> which already defined smp_mb__before_spinlock() as a smp_mb().
> 
> At the same time, we can get a much stronger construct if we place
> that same barrier _inside_ the spin_lock(). In that case we upgrade
> the RCpc spinlock to an RCsc.  That would make all schedule() calls
> fully transitive against one another.
> 
> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h   |    2 ++
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h |    3 +++
>  include/linux/atomic.h              |    3 +++
>  include/linux/spinlock.h            |   36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/core.c                 |    4 ++--
>  5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -367,5 +367,7 @@ static inline int arch_read_trylock(arch
>   * 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()
>  
>  #endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-03 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-02 11:38 [PATCH -v2 0/4] Getting rid of smp_mb__before_spinlock Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending() Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:00   ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-02 13:05     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:52       ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-02 14:16         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 13:00   ` ARC stuff (was Re: [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending()) Vineet Gupta
2017-08-02 13:17     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 14:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-03 15:27   ` [PATCH -v2 1/4] mm: Rework {set,clear,mm}_tlb_flush_pending() Will Deacon
2017-08-11  9:45   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 2/4] overlayfs: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock() usage Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 3/4] locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock() Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-03 15:28   ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-08-03 15:43     ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-08-02 11:38 ` [PATCH -v2 4/4] locking: Remove smp_mb__before_spinlock() Peter Zijlstra

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=20170803152820.GD20783@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --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=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --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