From: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] IOMMU Fixes for Linux v5.7-rc4
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 00:25:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200510222540.GF18353@8bytes.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wht3yDtJ6zka=DNaB8Nymh-zmUMZhGaC8yFz29nuW-EsA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:34:49AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 5:26 AM Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> wrote:
> >
> > The first race condition was around
> > the non-atomic update of the domain page-table root pointer
> > and the variable containing the page-table depth (called
> > mode). This is fixed now be merging page-table root and mode
> > into one 64-bit field which is read/written atomically.
>
> This seems a bit odd.
>
> The pointer part is always page-aligned, and the "mode" is just three bits.
>
> Why isn't it just encoded as one pointer with the low three bits being the mode?
>
> The thing is, the 64-bit atomic reads/writes are very expensive on
> 32-bit x86. If it was just a native pointer, it would be much cheaper
> than an "atomic64_t".
Yeah, when I think about it again, you are right. I think I used
atomic64_t just to be on the safe side with memory odering and all. But
in this case it doesn't really matter when a reader observes the
update, it is only important that the reader does not observe one field
updated while the other is not. And that should already be fullfilled
with 64-bit writes on x86-64, like a native pointer write.
I'll send a patch to Qian to test this, just to be sure I am not missing
anything.
Thanks,
Joerg
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-10 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-10 12:26 [git pull] IOMMU Fixes for Linux v5.7-rc4 Joerg Roedel
2020-05-10 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-05-10 22:25 ` Joerg Roedel [this message]
2020-05-10 19:45 ` pr-tracker-bot
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=20200510222540.GF18353@8bytes.org \
--to=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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