mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: joel@joelfernandes.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Uladzislau Rezki \(Sony\)" <urezki@gmail.com>,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/6] rcu/segcblist: Add additional comments to explain smp_mb()
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:24:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201017202411.GC842001@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201017031941.GD4015033@google.com>

[I sent this reply earlier, but since it hasn't shown up in the mailing 
list archives, I may have forgotten to include the proper CC's.  At the 
risk of repeating myself, here it is again.]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:19:41PM -0400, joel@joelfernandes.org wrote:
> So I made a litmus test to show that smp_mb() is needed also after the update
> to length. Basically, otherwise it is possible the callback will see garbage
> that the module cleanup/unload did.
> 
> C rcubarrier+ctrldep
> 
> (*
>  * Result: Never
>  *
>  * This litmus test shows that rcu_barrier (P1) prematurely
>  * returning by reading len 0 can cause issues if P0 does
>  * NOT have a smb_mb() after WRITE_ONCE(len, 1).
>  * mod_data == 2 means module was unloaded (so data is garbage).
>  *)
> 
> { int len = 0; int enq = 0; }
> 
> P0(int *len, int *mod_data, int *enq)
> {
> 	int r0;
> 
> 	WRITE_ONCE(*len, 1);
> 	smp_mb();		/* Needed! */
> 	WRITE_ONCE(*enq, 1);
> 
> 	r0 = READ_ONCE(*mod_data);
> }
> 
> P1(int *len, int *mod_data, int *enq)
> {
> 	int r0;
> 	int r1;
> 
> 	r1 = READ_ONCE(*enq);
> 
> 	// barrier Just for test purpose ("exists" clause) to force the..
> 	// ..rcu_barrier() to see enq before len
> 	smp_mb();		
> 	r0 = READ_ONCE(*len);
> 
> 	// implicit memory barrier due to conditional */
> 	if (r0 == 0)
> 		WRITE_ONCE(*mod_data, 2);
> }
> 
> // Did P0 read garbage?
> exists (0:r0=2 /\ 1:r0=0 /\ 1:r1=1)

Is this exists clause really what you meant?  Not only can it not be 
satisfied, it couldn't even be satisfied if you left out the 0:r0=2 
part.  And smp_mb() is stronger than neessary to enforce this.

However, some memory barrier is needed.  If the smp_mb() in P1 were 
omitted then P1 would be free to reorder its reads, and the exists 
clause could be satisfied as follows:

	P0			P1
	------------------------------------------
				Read len = 0
	Write len = 1
	smp_mb();
	Write enq = 1
				Read enq = 1
				Write mod_data = 2
	Read mod_data = 2

Alan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-10-17 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-15  0:22 [PATCH v7 0/6] Add support for length of each segment in the segcblist Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15  0:22 ` [PATCH v7 1/6] rcu/tree: Make rcu_do_batch count how many callbacks were executed Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15  0:22 ` [PATCH v7 2/6] rcu/segcblist: Add counters to segcblist datastructure Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15 12:21   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-17  1:31     ` joel
2020-10-21 15:33     ` joel
2020-10-21 21:53       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-21 22:31         ` Joel Fernandes
2020-10-18  8:23   ` [rcu/segcblist] e08055898f: WARNING:at_kernel/rcu/srcutree.c:#cleanup_srcu_struct kernel test robot
2020-10-21 14:40     ` joel
2020-10-15  0:22 ` [PATCH v7 3/6] rcu/trace: Add tracing for how segcb list changes Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15  0:22 ` [PATCH v7 4/6] rcu/segcblist: Remove useless rcupdate.h include Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15  0:23 ` [PATCH v7 5/6] rcu/tree: Remove redundant smp_mb() in rcu_do_batch Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15  0:23 ` [PATCH v7 6/6] rcu/segcblist: Add additional comments to explain smp_mb() Joel Fernandes (Google)
2020-10-15 13:35   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-17  1:27     ` joel
2020-10-17  3:19       ` joel
2020-10-17 13:29         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-18  0:35           ` joel
2020-10-19 12:37             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-21 18:57               ` Joel Fernandes
2020-10-21 21:16                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-10-17 20:24         ` Alan Stern [this message]
2020-10-18 20:45           ` Joel Fernandes
2020-10-18 21:15             ` Alan Stern
2020-10-17 14:31       ` Alan Stern
2020-10-18 20:16         ` Joel Fernandes

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=20201017202411.GC842001@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=neeraj.iitr10@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.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

Powered by JetHome