[PATCH 4.9 13/70] locking/rwsem-xadd: Fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-09-17T22:58:11Z

From: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>

commit 9c29c31830a4eca724e137a9339137204bbb31be upstream.

If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
to wakeup being missed:

spinning writer up_write caller
--------------- -----------------------
[S] osq_unlock() [L] osq
spin_lock(wait_lock)
sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
+0xFFFFFFFF00000000
count=sem->count
MB
sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
-0xFFFFFFFF00000001
spin_trylock(wait_lock)
return
rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
spin_unlock(wait_lock)
schedule()

Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().

The smp_rmb() will make sure that the spinner state is
consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dave@stgolabs.net
Cc: longman@redhat.com
Cc: parri.andrea@gmail.com
Cc: sramana@codeaurora.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1504794658-15397-1-git-send-email-prsood@codeaurora.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -574,6 +574,33 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct r
WAKE_Q(wake_q);

/*
+ * __rwsem_down_write_failed_common(sem)
+ * rwsem_optimistic_spin(sem)
+ * osq_unlock(sem->osq)
+ * ...
+ * atomic_long_add_return(&sem->count)
+ *
+ * - VS -
+ *
+ * __up_write()
+ * if (atomic_long_sub_return_release(&sem->count) < 0)
+ * rwsem_wake(sem)
+ * osq_is_locked(&sem->osq)
+ *
+ * And __up_write() must observe !osq_is_locked() when it observes the
+ * atomic_long_add_return() in order to not miss a wakeup.
+ *
+ * This boils down to:
+ *
+ * [S.rel] X = 1 [RmW] r0 = (Y += 0)
+ * MB RMB
+ * [RmW] Y += 1 [L] r1 = X
+ *
+ * exists (r0=1 /\ r1=0)
+ */
+ smp_rmb();
+
+ /*
* If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
* Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
* spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the