Received: by 10.192.165.148 with SMTP id m20csp1039453imm; Sat, 5 May 2018 03:36:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZogcBy7SCMWBeYVeMm7JdGF8Se1ijnaBnZBTHMRsnSjJVMKBds3LFqMjwGw6BVNhz1r1qnq X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:3281:: with SMTP id z1-v6mr30681918plb.226.1525516581861; Sat, 05 May 2018 03:36:21 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1525516581; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=orHD1QGZnawA+jbBEOQox6mrQDtqKslvinHmYq6va90sm9/rzHekLzMNs83LmE2Dsp 0EIxouWhBpOJHKjnDqs3lYhT3WjmFuJ6oWdnaEFBtz4Th3exfb+MHdOr9iaUnJpwMGhL 7DUD6ibJE6NAWIQyhRX7Ov/THy2hI7bnggtJPNAkCa7eT3rkI0YqDRB45aPO8aaF7MvI 2Ue+2m/1ljDkLTaCA7kuX8wB1Shemuc1Agf9QavufugPu6GA2iUREXwyJE2R2CIC2XOh O8jSmx+gI+K1mZrNwMtFW+7ybQWQ4MAkSVClcXocWVrhpVxlzU8EJeiU2NzGNoYmJW5g Vtzg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=cOZ8qZp8uxzi04DssxbAxTmRChExj8AbHkCGFhWLyks=; b=bA8h3rOOwueB+ZphdyF0MhP7lI80V3iYCkxsxOAkVVjGlf7JsvWSrBBQ/QDewBt5Zw fIiTx0Q9dkhnIvblH2JjuBeO2EaAskDwvOhsQ848CSADRHrn2hzCAPm8cBffuHzUSFwP 9AA5Dawgaf/Ab239CWjM0iWOlaqeU/eBnSvSuZoPX2YAPG223KxqUT4bjYKtLTrXRdTh kh5O6eCdSyk9BDtGGMKBHDmOML5YEgGlEl5tm4nLEkZbdrOSUNL56Bv+XNJBFfbuqRil UjXEXbxYQ0M5EPZJB25wAaablTUpqXjJrGNnPyUydlb6/iHQoFO8unKLYPduzf4HLgid oXXA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=gm5Z5/i9; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c41-v6si18063663plj.503.2018.05.05.03.36.06; Sat, 05 May 2018 03:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=gm5Z5/i9; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751157AbeEEKf4 (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 5 May 2018 06:35:56 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:51250 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750971AbeEEKfy (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 May 2018 06:35:54 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id j4so7417770wme.1 for ; Sat, 05 May 2018 03:35:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=cOZ8qZp8uxzi04DssxbAxTmRChExj8AbHkCGFhWLyks=; b=gm5Z5/i9eAIAxJMI4jvp/bNKkBgE6/KlEvgVFgRnT5Q7DbtxPUgwXw1H4UiyZWe6y1 2YaZ4lOSv4/6D3EYt97eCN27ZDCK4u7IO34Dgfo5ergZJ9s2aEoJ9/aTn6RQ085TOz1T h2uYvtiYfW6aKMrB7PdU4/HL4buHHaTvFBprR0ceJfFf+K5msfizMRqmp/bQ0bN4Emz9 tn1140eofh1Ji71kJ5H6I82uza0A0nNIup333ZivWHdNNskGpTdDbylbxGwSbMGqgz0e qF9ruxxrUAN/zXiR/MaMSBAW0b+dGgV7hyzH59upsL+L633fsOqayH9YUdBWG9xA08hI SX3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=cOZ8qZp8uxzi04DssxbAxTmRChExj8AbHkCGFhWLyks=; b=o+OCtNUXMUFtiI+blOOk8PNx//KNiHpd2kUz+WnG4B6FMmEVtxagEY4/9NGmf+Q5UI pMVR9K2QcVuHYea51FctoHrMnpQDqSJYwTP1NxJzD0RLkfDKGOmYEomOMYLIzKkpZcGF WLDx+SnF6d0KeHvmw55+ZtpH+fKXm5hYc+Fux9wXl4ToYcj7hhKNOPugBZxwQtM3NW4w CTZGoTJdyLsYSMnrSzahWY99r7sRmjU/LHYJ/+m5xnkCKHd+0LaEQrt7HQD5Stf8dcoc 0CZhhXVIsc3l7AmTUBRJwvTUsMMMVTbye/1fDsy4CvasAi2T/YuTG9GWjbkkyt+w9972 chbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tDXWQs4EooeS23Dl/5py46Gfo+EhtuC+YPdkPxfc/a9m0uc/gOO TeM9xY4T87scxln2byc7omc= X-Received: by 10.28.40.86 with SMTP id o83mr11901276wmo.3.1525516552956; Sat, 05 May 2018 03:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (2E8B0CD5.catv.pool.telekom.hu. [46.139.12.213]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s15-v6sm17424340wrg.70.2018.05.05.03.35.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sat, 05 May 2018 03:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 12:35:50 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Boqun Feng Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aryabinin@virtuozzo.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, dvyukov@google.com, will.deacon@arm.com Subject: [RFC PATCH] locking/atomics/powerpc: Clarify why the cmpxchg_relaxed() family of APIs falls back to full cmpxchg() Message-ID: <20180505103550.s7xsnto7tgppkmle@gmail.com> References: <20180504173937.25300-1-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180504173937.25300-2-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180504180105.GS12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180504180909.dnhfflibjwywnm4l@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <20180505081100.nsyrqrpzq2vd27bk@gmail.com> <20180505084721.GA32344@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180505090403.p2ywuen42rnlwizq@gmail.com> <20180505093829.xfylnedwd5nonhae@gmail.com> <20180505101609.5wb56j4mspjkokmw@tardis> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180505101609.5wb56j4mspjkokmw@tardis> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Boqun Feng wrote: > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 11:38:29AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > So we could do the following simplification on top of that: > > > > > > > > > > #ifndef atomic_fetch_dec_relaxed > > > > > # ifndef atomic_fetch_dec > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec(v) atomic_fetch_sub(1, (v)) > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_relaxed(v) atomic_fetch_sub_relaxed(1, (v)) > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_acquire(v) atomic_fetch_sub_acquire(1, (v)) > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_release(v) atomic_fetch_sub_release(1, (v)) > > > > > # else > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_relaxed atomic_fetch_dec > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_acquire atomic_fetch_dec > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_release atomic_fetch_dec > > > > > # endif > > > > > #else > > > > > # ifndef atomic_fetch_dec > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec(...) __atomic_op_fence(atomic_fetch_dec, __VA_ARGS__) > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_acquire(...) __atomic_op_acquire(atomic_fetch_dec, __VA_ARGS__) > > > > > # define atomic_fetch_dec_release(...) __atomic_op_release(atomic_fetch_dec, __VA_ARGS__) > > > > > # endif > > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > This would disallow an architecture to override just fetch_dec_release for > > > > instance. > > > > > > Couldn't such a crazy arch just define _all_ the 3 APIs in this group? > > > That's really a small price and makes the place pay the complexity > > > price that does the weirdness... > > > > > > > I don't think there currently is any architecture that does that, but the > > > > intent was to allow it to override anything and only provide defaults where it > > > > does not. > > > > > > I'd argue that if a new arch only defines one of these APIs that's probably a bug. > > > If they absolutely want to do it, they still can - by defining all 3 APIs. > > > > > > So there's no loss in arch flexibility. > > > > BTW., PowerPC for example is already in such a situation, it does not define > > atomic_cmpxchg_release(), only the other APIs: > > > > #define atomic_cmpxchg(v, o, n) (cmpxchg(&((v)->counter), (o), (n))) > > #define atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(v, o, n) \ > > cmpxchg_relaxed(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > #define atomic_cmpxchg_acquire(v, o, n) \ > > cmpxchg_acquire(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > > > Was it really the intention on the PowerPC side that the generic code falls back > > to cmpxchg(), i.e.: > > > > # define atomic_cmpxchg_release(...) __atomic_op_release(atomic_cmpxchg, __VA_ARGS__) > > > > So ppc has its own definition __atomic_op_release() in > arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h: > > #define __atomic_op_release(op, args...) \ > ({ \ > __asm__ __volatile__(PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER "" : : : "memory"); \ > op##_relaxed(args); \ > }) > > , and PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER is lwsync, so we map to > > lwsync(); > atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(v, o, n); > > And the reason, why we don't define atomic_cmpxchg_release() but define > atomic_cmpxchg_acquire() is that, atomic_cmpxchg_*() could provide no > ordering guarantee if the cmp fails, we did this for > atomic_cmpxchg_acquire() but not for atomic_cmpxchg_release(), because > doing so may introduce a memory barrier inside a ll/sc critical section, > please see the comment before __cmpxchg_u32_acquire() in > arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h: > > /* > * cmpxchg family don't have order guarantee if cmp part fails, therefore we > * can avoid superfluous barriers if we use assembly code to implement > * cmpxchg() and cmpxchg_acquire(), however we don't do the similar for > * cmpxchg_release() because that will result in putting a barrier in the > * middle of a ll/sc loop, which is probably a bad idea. For example, this > * might cause the conditional store more likely to fail. > */ Makes sense, thanks a lot for the explanation, missed that comment in the middle of the assembly functions! So the patch I sent is buggy, please disregard it. May I suggest the patch below? No change in functionality, but it documents the lack of the cmpxchg_release() APIs and maps them explicitly to the full cmpxchg() version. (Which the generic code does now in a rather roundabout way.) Also, the change to arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h has no functional effect right now either, but should anyone add a _relaxed() variant in the future, with this change atomic_cmpxchg_release() and atomic64_cmpxchg_release() will pick that up automatically. Would this be acceptable? Thanks, Ingo --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h | 4 ++++ arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 13 +++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h index 682b3e6a1e21..f7a6f29acb12 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/atomic.h @@ -213,6 +213,8 @@ static __inline__ int atomic_dec_return_relaxed(atomic_t *v) cmpxchg_relaxed(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) #define atomic_cmpxchg_acquire(v, o, n) \ cmpxchg_acquire(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) +#define atomic_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) #define atomic_xchg(v, new) (xchg(&((v)->counter), new)) #define atomic_xchg_relaxed(v, new) xchg_relaxed(&((v)->counter), (new)) @@ -519,6 +521,8 @@ static __inline__ long atomic64_dec_if_positive(atomic64_t *v) cmpxchg_relaxed(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) #define atomic64_cmpxchg_acquire(v, o, n) \ cmpxchg_acquire(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) +#define atomic64_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) #define atomic64_xchg(v, new) (xchg(&((v)->counter), new)) #define atomic64_xchg_relaxed(v, new) xchg_relaxed(&((v)->counter), (new)) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h index 9b001f1f6b32..1f1d35062f3a 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h @@ -512,6 +512,13 @@ __cmpxchg_acquire(void *ptr, unsigned long old, unsigned long new, (unsigned long)_o_, (unsigned long)_n_, \ sizeof(*(ptr))); \ }) + +/* + * cmpxchg_release() falls back to a full cmpxchg(), + * see the comments at __cmpxchg_u32_acquire(): + */ +#define cmpxchg_release cmpxchg + #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64 #define cmpxchg64(ptr, o, n) \ ({ \ @@ -538,5 +545,11 @@ __cmpxchg_acquire(void *ptr, unsigned long old, unsigned long new, #define cmpxchg64_local(ptr, o, n) __cmpxchg64_local_generic((ptr), (o), (n)) #endif +/* + * cmpxchg64_release() falls back to a full cmpxchg(), + * see the comments at __cmpxchg_u32_acquire(): + */ +#define cmpxchg64_release cmpxchg64 + #endif /* __KERNEL__ */ #endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_CMPXCHG_H_ */