public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Chris Boot <bootc@bootc.net>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 13:48:02 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5308F0E2.3030804@hurleysoftware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1393094608.11497.1.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>

On 02/22/2014 01:43 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 18:01 -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
>> On 02/21/2014 11:57 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> Yo,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:53:46AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
>>>> Ok, I can do that. But AFAIK it'll have to be an smp_rmb(); there is
>>>> no mb__after unlock.
>>>
>>> We do have smp_mb__after_unlock_lock().
>>>
>>>> [ After thinking about it some, I don't think preventing speculative
>>>>     writes before clearing PENDING if useful or necessary, so that's
>>>>     why I'm suggesting only the rmb. ]
>>>
>>> But smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() would be cheaper on most popular
>>> archs, I think.
>>
>> smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() is only for ordering memory operations
>> between two spin-locked sections on either the same lock or by
>> the same task/cpu. Like:
>>
>>      i = 1
>>      spin_unlock(lock1)
>>      spin_lock(lock2)
>>      smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()
>>      j = 1
>>
>> This guarantees that the store to j happens after the store to i.
>> Without it, a cpu can
>>
>>      spin_lock(lock2)
>>      j = 1
>>      i = 1
>>      spin_unlock(lock1)
>
> No the CPU cannot.  If the CPU were allowed to reorder locking
> sequences, we'd get speculation induced ABBA deadlocks.  The rules are
> quite simple: loads and stores cannot speculate out of critical
> sections.

If you look carefully, you'll notice that the stores have not been
moved from their respective critical sections; simply that the two
critical sections overlap because they use different locks.

Regards,
Peter Hurley

PS - Your reply address is unroutable.

> All architectures have barriers in place to prevent this ...
> I know from personal experience because the barriers on PARISC were
> originally too weak and we did get some speculation out of the critical
> sections, which was very nasty to debug.
>
> Stuff may speculate into critical sections from non-critical but never
> out of them and critical section boundaries may not reorder to cause an
> overlap.


  reply	other threads:[~2014-02-22 18:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-02-20 20:44 [PATCHSET wq/for-3.15] workqueue: remove PREPARE_[DELAYED_]WORK() Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 1/9] wireless/rt2x00: don't use PREPARE_WORK in rt2800usb.c Tejun Heo
2014-03-07 15:26   ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 2/9] ps3-vuart: don't use PREPARE_WORK Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 23:19   ` Geoff Levand
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 3/9] floppy: don't use PREPARE_[DELAYED_]WORK Tejun Heo
2014-02-21  9:37   ` Jiri Kosina
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK Tejun Heo
2014-02-21  1:44   ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21  1:59     ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21  2:07       ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21  2:13         ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21  5:13           ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21 10:03             ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 12:51               ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21 13:06                 ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 16:53                   ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21 16:57                     ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 23:01                       ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21 23:18                         ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 23:46                           ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-22 14:38                             ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-22 14:48                               ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-22 18:43                         ` James Bottomley
2014-02-22 18:48                           ` Peter Hurley [this message]
2014-02-22 18:52                             ` James Bottomley
2014-02-22 19:03                               ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-23  1:23                                 ` memory-barriers.txt again (was Re: [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK) Stefan Richter
2014-02-23 16:37                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-23 20:35                                     ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-23 23:50                                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-24  0:09                                         ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-24 16:26                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-24  0:32                                         ` Stefan Richter
2014-02-24 16:27                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-23 20:05                                 ` [PATCH 4/9] firewire: don't use PREPARE_DELAYED_WORK James Bottomley
2014-02-23 22:32                                   ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-21 20:45   ` Stefan Richter
2014-03-05 21:34     ` Stefan Richter
2014-03-07 15:18       ` Tejun Heo
2014-03-07 15:26   ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 5/9] usb: " Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:59   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-02-21 15:06     ` Alan Stern
2014-02-21 15:07       ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-22 14:59   ` [PATCH v2 " Tejun Heo
2014-02-22 15:14     ` Alan Stern
2014-02-22 15:20       ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-22 15:37       ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-22 23:03         ` Alan Stern
2014-02-23  4:29           ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 6/9] nvme: don't use PREPARE_WORK Tejun Heo
2014-03-07 15:26   ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 7/9] afs: " Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 22:00   ` David Howells
2014-02-20 22:46     ` Tejun Heo
2014-03-07 15:27   ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 8/9] staging/fwserial: " Tejun Heo
2014-02-21 15:13   ` Peter Hurley
2014-02-20 20:44 ` [PATCH 9/9] workqueue: remove PREPARE_[DELAYED_]WORK() Tejun Heo
2014-03-07 15:27   ` Tejun Heo

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=5308F0E2.3030804@hurleysoftware.com \
    --to=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
    --cc=bootc@bootc.net \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
    --cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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