Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] sched, numa: Document usages of mm->numa_scan_seq

[Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>]

On 04/28/2015 04:00 PM, Jason Low wrote:
> The p->mm->numa_scan_seq is accessed using READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE
> and modified without exclusive access. It is not clear why it is
> accessed this way. This patch provides some documentation on that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Low<jason.low2@hp.com>
> ---
>   kernel/sched/fair.c |   12 ++++++++++++
>   1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 5a44371..794f7d7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1794,6 +1794,11 @@ static void task_numa_placement(struct task_struct *p)
>   	u64 runtime, period;
>   	spinlock_t *group_lock = NULL;
>
> +	/*
> +	 * The p->mm->numa_scan_seq gets updated without
> +	 * exclusive access. Use READ_ONCE() here to ensure
> +	 * that the field is read in a single access.
> +	 */
>   	seq = READ_ONCE(p->mm->numa_scan_seq);
>   	if (p->numa_scan_seq == seq)
>   		return;
> @@ -2107,6 +2112,13 @@ void task_numa_fault(int last_cpupid, int mem_node, int pages, int flags)
>
>   static void reset_ptenuma_scan(struct task_struct *p)
>   {
> +	/*
> +	 * We only did a read acquisition of the mmap sem, so
> +	 * p->mm->numa_scan_seq is written to without exclusive access.
> +	 * That's not much of an issue though, since this is just used
> +	 * for statistical sampling. Use WRITE_ONCE and READ_ONCE, which
> +	 * are not expensive, to avoid load/store tearing.
> +	 */
>   	WRITE_ONCE(p->mm->numa_scan_seq, READ_ONCE(p->mm->numa_scan_seq) + 1);
>   	p->mm->numa_scan_offset = 0;
>   }

READ_ONCE followed by a WRITE_ONCE won't stop load/store tearing from 
happening unless you use an atomic instruction to do the increment. So I 
think your comment may be a bit misleading.

Cheers,
Longman