From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
1vier1@web.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ipc/mqueue.c: Update/document memory barriers
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:55:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011165527.bsdiw6gu2sk7yrnl@linux-p48b> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191011112009.2365-3-manfred@colorfullife.com>
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>Update and document memory barriers for mqueue.c:
>- ewp->state is read without any locks, thus READ_ONCE is required.
In general we relied on the barrier for not needing READ/WRITE_ONCE,
but I agree this scenario should be better documented with them.
Similarly imo, the 'state' should also need them for write, even if
under the lock -- consistency and documentation, for example.
In addition, I think it makes sense to encapsulate some of the
pipelined send/recv operations, that also can allow us to keep
the barrier comments in pipelined_send(), which I wonder why
you chose to remove. Something like so, before your changes:
diff --git a/ipc/mqueue.c b/ipc/mqueue.c
index 3d920ff15c80..be48c0ba92f7 100644
--- a/ipc/mqueue.c
+++ b/ipc/mqueue.c
@@ -918,17 +918,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(mq_unlink, const char __user *, u_name)
* The same algorithm is used for senders.
*/
-/* pipelined_send() - send a message directly to the task waiting in
- * sys_mq_timedreceive() (without inserting message into a queue).
- */
-static inline void pipelined_send(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
+static inline void __pipelined_op(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
struct mqueue_inode_info *info,
- struct msg_msg *message,
- struct ext_wait_queue *receiver)
+ struct ext_wait_queue *this)
{
- receiver->msg = message;
- list_del(&receiver->list);
- wake_q_add(wake_q, receiver->task);
+ list_del(&this->list);
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, this->task);
/*
* Rely on the implicit cmpxchg barrier from wake_q_add such
* that we can ensure that updating receiver->state is the last
@@ -937,7 +932,19 @@ static inline void pipelined_send(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
* yet, at that point we can later have a use-after-free
* condition and bogus wakeup.
*/
- receiver->state = STATE_READY;
+ this->state = STATE_READY;
+}
+
+/* pipelined_send() - send a message directly to the task waiting in
+ * sys_mq_timedreceive() (without inserting message into a queue).
+ */
+static inline void pipelined_send(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
+ struct mqueue_inode_info *info,
+ struct msg_msg *message,
+ struct ext_wait_queue *receiver)
+{
+ receiver->msg = message;
+ __pipelined_op(wake_q, info, receiver);
}
/* pipelined_receive() - if there is task waiting in sys_mq_timedsend()
@@ -955,9 +962,7 @@ static inline void pipelined_receive(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
if (msg_insert(sender->msg, info))
return;
- list_del(&sender->list);
- wake_q_add(wake_q, sender->task);
- sender->state = STATE_READY;
+ __pipelined_op(wake_q, info, sender);
}
static int do_mq_timedsend(mqd_t mqdes, const char __user *u_msg_ptr,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-11 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-11 11:20 [PATCH 0/3] Clarify/standardize memory barriers for ipc Manfred Spraul
2019-10-11 11:20 ` [PATCH 1/5] wake_q: Cleanup + Documentation update Manfred Spraul
2019-10-11 11:20 ` [PATCH 2/5] ipc/mqueue.c: Update/document memory barriers Manfred Spraul
2019-10-11 16:55 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2019-10-11 18:53 ` Manfred Spraul
2019-10-14 6:29 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-10-11 11:20 ` [PATCH 3/5] ipc/msg.c: Update and document " Manfred Spraul
2019-10-11 11:20 ` [PATCH 4/5] ipc/sem.c: Document and update " Manfred Spraul
2019-10-21 8:35 ` [ipc/sem.c] 6394de3b86: BUG:kernel_NULL_pointer_dereference,address kernel test robot
2019-10-23 18:28 ` Manfred Spraul
2019-10-11 11:20 ` [PATCH 5/5] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Clarify cmpxchg() Manfred Spraul
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=20191011165527.bsdiw6gu2sk7yrnl@linux-p48b \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=1vier1@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--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