Message-ID: <54E032F1.5060503@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 11:17:29 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
CC: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, peterz@infradead.org,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, waiman.long@hp.com,
        davej@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, jeremy@goop.org,
        paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, ak@linux.intel.com, jasowang@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, riel@redhat.com,
        borntraeger@de.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        a.ryabinin@samsung.com, sasha.levin@oracle.com, dave@stgolabs.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] x86 spinlock: Fix memory corruption on completing
 completions
References: <1423809941-11125-1-git-send-email-raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150213153228.GA9535@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150213153228.GA9535@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2057
Lines: 61

On 02/13/2015 09:02 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/13, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>>
>> @@ -164,7 +161,7 @@ static inline int arch_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
>>   {
>>   	struct __raw_tickets tmp = READ_ONCE(lock->tickets);
>>
>> -	return tmp.tail != tmp.head;
>> +	return tmp.tail != (tmp.head & ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG);
>>   }
>
> Well, this can probably use __tickets_equal() too. But this is cosmetic.

That looks good. Added.

> It seems that arch_spin_is_contended() should be fixed with this change,
>
> 	(__ticket_t)(tmp.tail - tmp.head) > TICKET_LOCK_INC
>
> can be true because of TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG in .head, even if it is actually
> unlocked.


Done.
Hmm! it was because I was still under impression that slowpath bit is
in tail. You are right, situation could lead to positive max and may
report false contention.

And the "(__ticket_t)" typecast looks unnecessary, it only adds more
> confusuin, but this is cosmetic too.
>

Done.

>> @@ -772,7 +773,8 @@ __visible void kvm_lock_spinning(struct arch_spinlock *lock, __ticket_t want)
>>   	 * check again make sure it didn't become free while
>>   	 * we weren't looking.
>>   	 */
>> -	if (ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets.head) == want) {
>> +	head = READ_ONCE(lock->tickets.head);
>> +	if (__tickets_equal(head, want)) {
>>   		add_stats(TAKEN_SLOW_PICKUP, 1);
>>   		goto out;
>
> This is off-topic, but with or without this change perhaps it makes sense
> to add smp_mb__after_atomic(). It is nop on x86, just to make this code
> more understandable for those (for me ;) who can never remember even the
> x86 rules.
>

Hope you meant it for add_stat. yes  smp_mb__after_atomic() would be
harmless barrier() in x86. Did not add this V5 as yoiu though  but this
made me look at slowpath_enter code and added an explicit barrier() 
there :).


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/