From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] locking/qspinlock: Ensure node is initialised before updating prev->next
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:22:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1518528177-19169-2-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1518528177-19169-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
When a locker ends up queuing on the qspinlock locking slowpath, we
initialise the relevant mcs node and publish it indirectly by updating
the tail portion of the lock word using xchg_tail. If we find that there
was a pre-existing locker in the queue, we subsequently update their
->next field to point at our node so that we are notified when it's our
turn to take the lock.
This can be roughly illustrated as follows:
/* Initialise the fields in node and encode a pointer to node in tail */
tail = initialise_node(node);
/*
* Exchange tail into the lockword using an atomic read-modify-write
* operation with release semantics
*/
old = xchg_tail(lock, tail);
/* If there was a pre-existing waiter ... */
if (old & _Q_TAIL_MASK) {
prev = decode_tail(old);
smp_read_barrier_depends();
/* ... then update their ->next field to point to node.
WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, node);
}
The conditional update of prev->next therefore relies on the address
dependency from the result of xchg_tail ensuring order against the
prior initialisation of node. However, since the release semantics of
the xchg_tail operation apply only to the write portion of the RmW,
then this ordering is not guaranteed and it is possible for the CPU
to return old before the writes to node have been published, consequently
allowing us to point prev->next to an uninitialised node.
This patch fixes the problem by making the update of prev->next a RELEASE
operation, which also removes the reliance on dependency ordering.
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
---
kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index 38ece035039e..348c8cec1042 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -408,14 +408,15 @@ void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
*/
if (old & _Q_TAIL_MASK) {
prev = decode_tail(old);
+
/*
- * The above xchg_tail() is also a load of @lock which
- * generates, through decode_tail(), a pointer. The address
- * dependency matches the RELEASE of xchg_tail() such that
- * the subsequent access to @prev happens after.
+ * We must ensure that the stores to @node are observed before
+ * the write to prev->next. The address dependency from
+ * xchg_tail is not sufficient to ensure this because the read
+ * component of xchg_tail is unordered with respect to the
+ * initialisation of @node.
*/
-
- WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, node);
+ smp_store_release(&prev->next, node);
pv_wait_node(node, prev);
arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(&node->locked);
--
2.1.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-13 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-13 13:22 [PATCH 0/2] A couple of qspinlock fixes Will Deacon
2018-02-13 13:22 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2018-02-13 15:27 ` [tip:locking/urgent] locking/qspinlock: Ensure node is initialised before updating prev->next tip-bot for Will Deacon
2018-02-13 13:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] locking/qspinlock: Ensure node->count is updated before initialising node Will Deacon
2018-02-13 15:27 ` [tip:locking/urgent] " tip-bot for Will Deacon
2018-02-13 13:45 ` [PATCH 0/2] A couple of qspinlock fixes 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=1518528177-19169-2-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.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
Powered by JetHome