From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Bernard Metzler <bmt@zurich.ibm.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rdma/siw: avoid smp_store_mb() on a u64
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:23:01 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190725172301.GA6225@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190712085212.3901785-1-arnd@arndb.de>
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 10:51:23AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The new siw driver fails to build on i386 with
>
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_qp.c:1025:3: error: invalid output size for constraint '+q'
> smp_store_mb(*cq->notify, SIW_NOTIFY_NOT);
> ^
> include/asm-generic/barrier.h:141:35: note: expanded from macro 'smp_store_mb'
> #define smp_store_mb(var, value) __smp_store_mb(var, value)
> ^
> arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h:65:47: note: expanded from macro '__smp_store_mb'
> #define __smp_store_mb(var, value) do { (void)xchg(&var, value); } while (0)
> ^
> include/asm-generic/atomic-instrumented.h:1648:2: note: expanded from macro 'xchg'
> arch_xchg(__ai_ptr, __VA_ARGS__); \
> ^
> arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:78:27: note: expanded from macro 'arch_xchg'
> #define arch_xchg(ptr, v) __xchg_op((ptr), (v), xchg, "")
> ^
> arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:48:19: note: expanded from macro '__xchg_op'
> : "+q" (__ret), "+m" (*(ptr)) \
> ^
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_qp.o: In function `siw_sqe_complete':
> siw_qp.c:(.text+0x1450): undefined reference to `__xchg_wrong_size'
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_qp.o: In function `siw_rqe_complete':
> siw_qp.c:(.text+0x15b0): undefined reference to `__xchg_wrong_size'
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_verbs.o: In function `siw_req_notify_cq':
> siw_verbs.c:(.text+0x18ff): undefined reference to `__xchg_wrong_size'
>
> Since smp_store_mb() has to be an atomic store, but the architecture
> can only do this on 32-bit quantities or smaller, but 'cq->notify'
> is a 64-bit word.
>
> Apparently the smp_store_mb() is paired with a READ_ONCE() here, which
> seems like an odd choice because there is only a barrier on the writer
> side and not the reader, and READ_ONCE() is already not atomic on
> quantities larger than a CPU register.
>
> I suspect it is sufficient to use the (possibly nonatomic) WRITE_ONCE()
> and an SMP memory barrier here. If it does need to be atomic as well
> as 64-bit quantities, using an atomic64_set_release()/atomic64_read_acquire()
> may be a better choice.
>
> Fixes: 303ae1cdfdf7 ("rdma/siw: application interface")
> Fixes: f29dd55b0236 ("rdma/siw: queue pair methods")
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_qp.c | 4 +++-
> drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_verbs.c | 5 +++--
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Bernard, please send at patch for whatever solution we settled on
against 5.3-rc1
Thanks,
Jason
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-25 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-12 8:51 [PATCH] rdma/siw: avoid smp_store_mb() on a u64 Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-12 11:33 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 11:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-12 12:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 12:27 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 13:05 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-12 13:35 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 13:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-12 15:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 20:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-12 13:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 14:35 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 14:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 15:24 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 15:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 17:40 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 17:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-07-12 18:06 ` Bernard Metzler
2019-07-12 16:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-25 17:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe [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=20190725172301.GA6225@ziepe.ca \
--to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bmt@zurich.ibm.com \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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