From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched?
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 15:17:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160516131751.GH3205@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160516105557.GL3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:55:57PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So the barriers already forbid that the compiler reorders code. How on earth
> > is the compiler supposed to optimize the dec/inc out?
>
> Order things like:
>
> > #define sched_preempt_enable_no_resched() \
> > do { \
> > barrier(); \
> > preempt_count_dec(); \
> > } while (0)
>
> > #define preempt_disable() \
> > do { \
> > preempt_count_inc(); \
> > barrier(); \
> > } while (0)
>
> And there is no barrier between the dec and inc, and a smarty pants
> compiler could just decide to forgo the update, since in program order
> there is no observable difference either way.
>
> Making the thing volatile tells the compiler there can be external
> observations of the memory and it cannot assume things like that and
> must emit the operations.
...
> So I'll go write a proper changelog for the volatile thing and get it
> merged with a Cc to stable.
---
Subject: sched,preempt: Fix preempt_count manipulations
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: Mon May 16 15:01:11 CEST 2016
Vikram reported that his ARM64 compiler managed to 'optimize' away the
preempt_count manipulations in code like:
preempt_enable_no_resched();
put_user();
preempt_disable();
Irrespective of that fact that that is horrible code that should be
fixed for many reasons, it does highlight a deficiency in the generic
preempt_count manipulators. As it is never right to combine/elide
preempt_count manipulations like this.
Therefore sprinkle some volatile in the two generic accessors to
ensure the compiler is aware of the fact that the preempt_count is
observed outside of the regular program-order view and thus cannot be
optimized away like this.
x86; the only arch not using the generic code is not affected as we
do all this in asm in order to use the segment base per-cpu stuff.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Fixes: a787870924db ("sched, arch: Create asm/preempt.h")
Reported-by: Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>
Tested-by: Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
include/asm-generic/preempt.h | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/include/asm-generic/preempt.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/preempt.h
@@ -7,10 +7,10 @@
static __always_inline int preempt_count(void)
{
- return current_thread_info()->preempt_count;
+ return READ_ONCE(current_thread_info()->preempt_count);
}
-static __always_inline int *preempt_count_ptr(void)
+static __always_inline volatile int *preempt_count_ptr(void)
{
return ¤t_thread_info()->preempt_count;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-16 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-13 6:39 Vikram Mulukutla
2016-05-13 14:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-05-13 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-13 22:44 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2016-05-14 15:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-05-14 18:28 ` Vikram Mulukutla
2016-05-16 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-16 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-05-16 13:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-05-17 14:21 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched/preempt: Fix preempt_count manipulations tip-bot for 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=20160516131751.GH3205@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markivx@codeaurora.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®