QEMU-Arm Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Glauber <jglauber@marvell.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Rafael David Tinoco <rafaeldtinoco@ubuntu.com>,
	lizhengui <lizhengui@huawei.com>,
	dann frazier <dann.frazier@canonical.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Bug 1805256 <1805256@bugs.launchpad.net>,
	QEMU Developers - ARM <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 14:36:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191007143629.GA23062@hc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6dd73749-49b0-0fbc-b9bb-44c3736642b8@redhat.com>

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 01:06:20PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/10/19 11:23, Jan Glauber wrote:
> > I've looked into this on ThunderX2. The arm64 code generated for the
> > atomic_[add|sub] accesses of ctx->notify_me doesn't contain any
> > memory barriers. It is just plain ldaxr/stlxr.
> > 
> > From my understanding this is not sufficient for SMP sync.
> > 
> > If I read this comment correct:
> > 
> >     void aio_notify(AioContext *ctx)
> >     {
> >         /* Write e.g. bh->scheduled before reading ctx->notify_me.  Pairs
> >          * with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or atomic_add in aio_poll.
> >          */
> >         smp_mb();
> >         if (ctx->notify_me) {
> > 
> > it points out that the smp_mb() should be paired. But as
> > I said the used atomics don't generate any barriers at all.
> 
> Based on the rest of the thread, this patch should also fix the bug:
> 
> diff --git a/util/async.c b/util/async.c
> index 47dcbfa..721ea53 100644
> --- a/util/async.c
> +++ b/util/async.c
> @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source)
>      aio_notify_accept(ctx);
>  
>      for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) {
> -        if (bh->scheduled) {
> +        if (atomic_mb_read(&bh->scheduled)) {
>              return true;
>          }
>      }
> 
> 
> And also the memory barrier in aio_notify can actually be replaced
> with a SEQ_CST load:
> 
> diff --git a/util/async.c b/util/async.c
> index 47dcbfa..721ea53 100644
> --- a/util/async.c
> +++ b/util/async.c
> @@ -349,11 +349,11 @@ LinuxAioState *aio_get_linux_aio(AioContext *ctx)
>  
>  void aio_notify(AioContext *ctx)
>  {
> -    /* Write e.g. bh->scheduled before reading ctx->notify_me.  Pairs
> -     * with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or atomic_add in aio_poll.
> +    /* Using atomic_mb_read ensures that e.g. bh->scheduled is written before
> +     * ctx->notify_me is read.  Pairs with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or
> +     * atomic_add in aio_poll.
>       */
> -    smp_mb();
> -    if (ctx->notify_me) {
> +    if (atomic_mb_read(&ctx->notify_me)) {
>          event_notifier_set(&ctx->notifier);
>          atomic_mb_set(&ctx->notified, true);
>      }
> 
> 
> Would you be able to test these (one by one possibly)?

Sure.

> > I've tried to verify me theory with this patch and didn't run into the
> > issue for ~500 iterations (usually I would trigger the issue ~20 iterations).
> 
> Sorry for asking the obvious---500 iterations of what?

The testcase mentioned in the Canonical issue:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1805256

It's a simple image convert:
qemu-img convert -f qcow2 -O qcow2 ./disk01.qcow2 ./output.qcow2

Usually it got stuck after 3-20 iterations.

--Jan

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-07 14:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-11  2:15 [Qemu-arm] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues Rafael David Tinoco
2019-09-11  7:05 ` Rafael David Tinoco
2019-09-11 13:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-09-11 14:48   ` [Qemu-devel] " Rafael David Tinoco
2019-09-11 19:09   ` [Qemu-arm] " Rafael David Tinoco
2019-09-24 20:25     ` [Qemu-devel] " dann frazier
2019-10-02  9:23       ` Jan Glauber
2019-10-02  9:45         ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-02 11:05           ` Jan Glauber
2019-10-02 13:20             ` memory barriers and ATOMIC_SEQ_CST on aarch64 (was Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues) Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-02 14:58               ` Torvald Riegel
2019-10-02 16:30                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-07 11:06         ` [Qemu-devel] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-07 14:36           ` Jan Glauber [this message]
2019-10-07 14:44           ` dann frazier
2019-10-07 14:58             ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-09  8:02               ` Jan Glauber
2019-10-09  9:15                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-11  6:05                   ` Jan Glauber
2019-10-11  8:18                     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-11  8:30                       ` Jan Glauber
2019-10-11 17:50                     ` dann frazier

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=20191007143629.GA23062@hc \
    --to=jglauber@marvell.com \
    --cc=1805256@bugs.launchpad.net \
    --cc=dann.frazier@canonical.com \
    --cc=lizhengui@huawei.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=rafaeldtinoco@ubuntu.com \
    /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