From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
1vier1@web.de, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core: update memory barriers.
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 13:56:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1472385376-8801-4-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1472385376-8801-3-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com>
Change the locking for nf_conntrack_lock and nf_conntract_lock_all()
to the approach used by ipc/sem.c:
- use smp_store_mb() instead of a raw smp_mb()
- use smp_mb__after_spin_lock().
- for nf_conntrack_lock, use spin_lock(&global_lock) instead of
spin_unlock_wait(&global_lock) and loop backward.
The last change avoids that nf_conntrack_lock() could loop multiple times.
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
---
net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
index dd2c43a..ded1adc 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
@@ -80,20 +80,29 @@ static __read_mostly bool nf_conntrack_locks_all;
void nf_conntrack_lock(spinlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock)
{
+ /* Step 1: Acquire the lock */
spin_lock(lock);
- while (unlikely(nf_conntrack_locks_all)) {
- spin_unlock(lock);
- /*
- * Order the 'nf_conntrack_locks_all' load vs. the
- * spin_unlock_wait() loads below, to ensure
- * that 'nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock' is indeed held:
- */
- smp_rmb(); /* spin_lock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock) */
- spin_unlock_wait(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock);
- spin_lock(lock);
- }
+ /* Step 2: make it visible to all CPUs that we hold the lock */
+ smp_mb__after_spin_lock();
+
+ /* Step 3: read locks_all, with ACQUIRE semantics */
+ if (likely(smp_load_acquire(&nf_conntrack_locks_all) == false))
+ return;
+
+ /* slow path: unlock */
+ spin_unlock(lock);
+
+ /* Slow path, step 1: get global lock */
+ spin_lock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock);
+
+ /* Slow path, step 2: get the lock we want */
+ spin_lock(lock);
+
+ /* Slow path, step 3: release the global lock */
+ spin_unlock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock);
}
+
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nf_conntrack_lock);
static void nf_conntrack_double_unlock(unsigned int h1, unsigned int h2)
@@ -133,15 +142,14 @@ static void nf_conntrack_all_lock(void)
int i;
spin_lock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock);
- nf_conntrack_locks_all = true;
/*
- * Order the above store of 'nf_conntrack_locks_all' against
+ * Order the store of 'nf_conntrack_locks_all' against
* the spin_unlock_wait() loads below, such that if
* nf_conntrack_lock() observes 'nf_conntrack_locks_all'
* we must observe nf_conntrack_locks[] held:
*/
- smp_mb(); /* spin_lock(&nf_conntrack_locks_all_lock) */
+ smp_store_mb(nf_conntrack_locks_all, true);
for (i = 0; i < CONNTRACK_LOCKS; i++) {
spin_unlock_wait(&nf_conntrack_locks[i]);
--
2.5.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-28 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-28 11:56 [PATCH 0/4] Clarify/standardize memory barriers for lock/unlock Manfred Spraul
2016-08-28 11:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] spinlock: Document memory barrier rules Manfred Spraul
2016-08-28 11:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] barrier.h: Move smp_mb__after_unlock_lock to barrier.h Manfred Spraul
2016-08-28 11:56 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2016-08-28 11:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] qspinlock for x86: smp_mb__after_spin_lock() is free Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-29 10:51 ` [PATCH 3/4] net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core: update memory barriers Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-28 13:43 ` [PATCH 2/4] barrier.h: Move smp_mb__after_unlock_lock to barrier.h Paul E. McKenney
2016-08-28 16:31 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-08-28 18:00 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-08-28 14:41 ` kbuild test robot
2016-08-28 17:43 ` [PATCH 2/4 v3] spinlock.h: Move smp_mb__after_unlock_lock to spinlock.h Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 10:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] spinlock: Document memory barrier rules Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-29 12:54 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-31 4:59 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-08-31 15:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-31 16:40 ` Will Deacon
2016-08-31 18:32 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-09-01 8:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-01 11:04 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-09-01 11:19 ` Will Deacon
2016-09-01 11:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-01 14:05 ` Boqun Feng
2016-08-29 10:53 ` [PATCH 0/4] Clarify/standardize memory barriers for lock/unlock Peter Zijlstra
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=1472385376-8801-4-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=1vier1@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®