From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: Heinz.Egger@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Molnar, Ingo" <mingo@kernel.org>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Perf user-space ABI sequence lock memory barriers
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 22:56:24 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <238497929.19329.1391554584871.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <104831840.19303.1391553779700.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Hi,
I'm currently integrating user-space performance counters from
Perf into LTTng-UST, and I'm noticing something odd regarding
the home-made sequence lock found at:
kernel/events/core.c: perf_event_update_userpage()
++userpg->lock;
barrier();
[...]
barrier();
++userpg->lock;
This goes in pair with something like this at user-level:
do {
seq = pc->lock;
barrier();
idx = pc->index;
count = pc->offset;
if (idx)
count += rdpmc(idx - 1);
barrier();
} while (pc->lock != seq);
As we see, only compiler barrier() are protecting all this.
First question, is it possible that the update be performed
by a thread running on a different CPU than the thread reading
the info in user-space ?
I would be tempted to use a volatile semantic on all reads of the
lock field (ACCESS_ONCE()). Secondly, read sequence locks usually use a
smp_rmb() at the end of the seqcount_begin(), and at the beginning
of the seqcount_retry(). Moreover, this is usually matched
by smp_wmb() in write_seqcount begin/end().
Am I missing something special about this lock that makes these
barriers unnecessary ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-04 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <104831840.19303.1391553779700.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
2014-02-04 22:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2014-02-05 8:05 ` Perf user-space ABI sequence lock memory barriers Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-05 20:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=238497929.19329.1391554584871.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=Heinz.Egger@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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