From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Barrier before pushing desc_ring tail: was [PATCH v2 2/3] printk: add lockless buffer
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 13:37:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200609113751.GD23752@linux-b0ei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200501094010.17694-3-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
On Fri 2020-05-01 11:46:09, John Ogness wrote:
> Introduce a multi-reader multi-writer lockless ringbuffer for storing
> the kernel log messages. Readers and writers may use their API from
> any context (including scheduler and NMI). This ringbuffer will make
> it possible to decouple printk() callers from any context, locking,
> or console constraints. It also makes it possible for readers to have
> full access to the ringbuffer contents at any time and context (for
> example from any panic situation).
>
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.c
> +/*
> + * Advance the desc ring tail. This function advances the tail by one
> + * descriptor, thus invalidating the oldest descriptor. Before advancing
> + * the tail, the tail descriptor is made reusable and all data blocks up to
> + * and including the descriptor's data block are invalidated (i.e. the data
> + * ring tail is pushed past the data block of the descriptor being made
> + * reusable).
> + */
> +static bool desc_push_tail(struct printk_ringbuffer *rb,
> + unsigned long tail_id)
> +{
> + struct prb_desc_ring *desc_ring = &rb->desc_ring;
> + enum desc_state d_state;
> + struct prb_desc desc;
> +
> + d_state = desc_read(desc_ring, tail_id, &desc);
> +
> + switch (d_state) {
> + case desc_miss:
> + /*
> + * If the ID is exactly 1 wrap behind the expected, it is
> + * in the process of being reserved by another writer and
> + * must be considered reserved.
> + */
> + if (DESC_ID(atomic_long_read(&desc.state_var)) ==
> + DESC_ID_PREV_WRAP(desc_ring, tail_id)) {
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * The ID has changed. Another writer must have pushed the
> + * tail and recycled the descriptor already. Success is
> + * returned because the caller is only interested in the
> + * specified tail being pushed, which it was.
> + */
> + return true;
> + case desc_reserved:
> + return false;
> + case desc_committed:
> + desc_make_reusable(desc_ring, tail_id);
> + break;
> + case desc_reusable:
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Data blocks must be invalidated before their associated
> + * descriptor can be made available for recycling. Invalidating
> + * them later is not possible because there is no way to trust
> + * data blocks once their associated descriptor is gone.
> + */
> +
> + if (!data_push_tail(rb, &rb->text_data_ring, desc.text_blk_lpos.next))
> + return false;
> + if (!data_push_tail(rb, &rb->dict_data_ring, desc.dict_blk_lpos.next))
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * Check the next descriptor after @tail_id before pushing the tail
> + * to it because the tail must always be in a committed or reusable
> + * state. The implementation of prb_first_seq() relies on this.
> + *
> + * A successful read implies that the next descriptor is less than or
> + * equal to @head_id so there is no risk of pushing the tail past the
> + * head.
> + */
> + d_state = desc_read(desc_ring, DESC_ID(tail_id + 1),
> + &desc); /* LMM(desc_push_tail:A) */
> + if (d_state == desc_committed || d_state == desc_reusable) {
> + /*
> + * Any CPU that loads the new tail ID, must see that the
> + * descriptor at @tail_id is in the reusable state. See the
> + * read memory barrier part of desc_reserve:D for details.
> + */
I was quite confused by the above comment. Does it mean that we need
a barrier here? Or does it explain why the cmpxchg has its own
LMM marker?
I think that we actually need a full barrier here to make sure that
all CPUs see the changes made by data_push_tail() before we
allow to rewrite the descriptor. The changes in data_push_tail() might
be done on different CPUs.
It is similar like the full barrier in data_push_tail() before changing
data_ring->tail_lpos.
Best Regards,
Petr
> + atomic_long_cmpxchg_relaxed(&desc_ring->tail_id, tail_id,
> + DESC_ID(tail_id + 1)); /* LMM(desc_push_tail:B) */
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * Guarantee the last state load from desc_read() is before
> + * reloading @tail_id in order to see a new tail ID in the
> + * case that the descriptor has been recycled. This pairs
> + * with desc_reserve:D.
> + *
> + * Memory barrier involvement:
> + *
> + * If desc_push_tail:A reads from desc_reserve:G, then
> + * desc_push_tail:D reads from desc_push_tail:B.
> + *
> + * Relies on:
> + *
> + * MB from desc_push_tail:B to desc_reserve:G
> + * matching
> + * RMB from desc_push_tail:A to desc_push_tail:D
> + *
> + * Note: desc_push_tail:B and desc_reserve:G can be different
> + * CPUs. However, the desc_reserve:G CPU (which performs
> + * the full memory barrier) must have previously seen
> + * desc_push_tail:B.
> + */
> + smp_rmb(); /* LMM(desc_push_tail:C) */
> +
> + /*
> + * Re-check the tail ID. The descriptor following @tail_id is
> + * not in an allowed tail state. But if the tail has since
> + * been moved by another task, then it does not matter.
> + */
> + if (atomic_long_read(&desc_ring->tail_id) ==
> + tail_id) { /* LMM(desc_push_tail:D) */
> + return false;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/* Reserve a new descriptor, invalidating the oldest if necessary. */
> +static bool desc_reserve(struct printk_ringbuffer *rb, unsigned long *id_out)
> +{
> + struct prb_desc_ring *desc_ring = &rb->desc_ring;
> + unsigned long prev_state_val;
> + unsigned long id_prev_wrap;
> + struct prb_desc *desc;
> + unsigned long head_id;
> + unsigned long id;
> +
> + head_id = atomic_long_read(&desc_ring->head_id
> + ); /* LMM(desc_reserve:A) */
> +
> + do {
> + desc = to_desc(desc_ring, head_id);
> +
> + id = DESC_ID(head_id + 1);
> + id_prev_wrap = DESC_ID_PREV_WRAP(desc_ring, id);
> +
> + /*
> + * Guarantee the head ID is read before reading the tail ID.
> + * Since the tail ID is updated before the head ID, this
> + * guarantees that @id_prev_wrap is never ahead of the tail
> + * ID. This pairs with desc_reserve:D.
> + *
> + * Memory barrier involvement:
> + *
> + * If desc_reserve:A reads from desc_reserve:E, then
> + * desc_reserve:C reads from desc_push_tail:B.
> + *
> + * Relies on:
> + *
> + * MB from desc_push_tail:B to desc_reserve:E
> + * matching
> + * RMB from desc_reserve:A to desc_reserve:C
> + *
> + * Note: desc_push_tail:B and desc_reserve:E can be different
> + * CPUs. However, the desc_reserve:E CPU (which performs
> + * the full memory barrier) must have previously seen
> + * desc_push_tail:B.
> + */
> + smp_rmb(); /* LMM(desc_reserve:B) */
> +
> + if (id_prev_wrap == atomic_long_read(&desc_ring->tail_id
> + )) { /* LMM(desc_reserve:C) */
> + /*
> + * Make space for the new descriptor by
> + * advancing the tail.
> + */
> + if (!desc_push_tail(rb, id_prev_wrap))
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Guarantee the tail ID is read before validating the
> + * recycled descriptor state. A read memory barrier is
> + * sufficient for this. This pairs with data_push_tail:C.
> + *
> + * Memory barrier involvement:
> + *
> + * If desc_reserve:C reads from desc_push_tail:B, then
> + * desc_reserve:F reads from desc_make_reusable:A.
> + *
> + * Relies on:
> + *
> + * MB from desc_make_reusable:A to desc_push_tail:B
> + * matching
> + * RMB from desc_reserve:C to desc_reserve:F
> + *
> + * Note: desc_make_reusable:A, desc_push_tail:B, and
> + * data_push_tail:C can all be different CPUs. However,
> + * the desc_push_tail:B CPU must have previously seen
> + * data_push_tail:D and the data_push_tail:D CPU (which
> + * performs the full memory barrier) must have
> + * previously seen desc_make_reusable:A.
> + *
> + * Guarantee any data ring tail changes are stored before
> + * recycling the descriptor. Data ring tail changes can happen
> + * via desc_push_tail()->data_push_tail(). A full memory
> + * barrier is needed since another task may have pushed the
> + * data ring tails. This pairs with data_push_tail:A.
> + *
> + * Guarantee a new tail ID is stored before recycling the
> + * descriptor. A full memory barrier is needed since another
> + * task may have pushed the tail ID. This pairs with
> + * desc_push_tail:C and prb_first_seq:C.
> + *
> + * Guarantee the tail ID is stored before storing the head ID.
> + * This pairs with desc_reserve:B.
> + */
> + smp_mb(); /* LMM(desc_reserve:D) */
> +
> + } while (!atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(&desc_ring->head_id,
> + &head_id, id)); /* LMM(desc_reserve:E) */
> +
> + desc = to_desc(desc_ring, id);
> +
> + /*
> + * If the descriptor has been recycled, verify the old state val.
> + * See "ABA Issues" about why this verification is performed.
> + */
> + prev_state_val = atomic_long_read(&desc->state_var
> + ); /* LMM(desc_reserve:F) */
> + if (prev_state_val && prev_state_val != (id_prev_wrap |
> + DESC_COMMITTED_MASK |
> + DESC_REUSE_MASK)) {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Assign the descriptor a new ID and set its state to reserved.
> + * See "ABA Issues" about why cmpxchg() instead of set() is used.
> + */
> + if (!atomic_long_try_cmpxchg_relaxed(&desc->state_var,
> + &prev_state_val, id | 0)) { /* LMM(desc_reserve:G) */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Guarantee the new descriptor ID and state is stored before making
> + * any other changes. This pairs with desc_read:D.
> + */
> + smp_wmb(); /* LMM(desc_reserve:H) */
> +
> + /* Now data in @desc can be modified: LMM(desc_reserve:I) */
> +
> + *id_out = id;
> + return true;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-09 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-01 9:40 [PATCH v2 0/3] printk: replace ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-05-01 9:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] crash: add VMCOREINFO macro for anonymous structs John Ogness
2020-06-03 10:16 ` Petr Mladek
2020-05-01 9:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] printk: add lockless buffer John Ogness
[not found] ` <87v9ktcs3q.fsf@vostro.fn.ogness.net>
2020-05-18 17:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-05-19 20:34 ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 7:10 ` blk->id read race: was: " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 14:18 ` John Ogness
2020-06-10 8:42 ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-10 13:55 ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 9:31 ` redundant check in make_data_reusable(): was " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 14:48 ` John Ogness
2020-06-10 9:38 ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-10 10:24 ` John Ogness
2020-06-10 14:56 ` John Ogness
2020-06-11 19:51 ` John Ogness
2020-06-11 13:55 ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-11 20:25 ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 9:48 ` Full barrier in data_push_tail(): " Petr Mladek
2020-06-09 15:03 ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 11:37 ` Petr Mladek [this message]
2020-06-09 15:56 ` Barrier before pushing desc_ring tail: " John Ogness
2020-06-11 12:01 ` Petr Mladek
2020-06-11 23:06 ` John Ogness
2020-06-09 14:38 ` data_ring head_lpos and tail_lpos synchronization: " Petr Mladek
2020-06-10 7:53 ` John Ogness
2020-05-01 9:40 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] printk: use the lockless ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-05-06 14:50 ` John Ogness
2020-05-13 12:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] printk: replace ringbuffer Prarit Bhargava
2020-05-15 10:24 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
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=20200609113751.GD23752@linux-b0ei \
--to=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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