Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2023 22:25:44 +0100
From:   Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc:     paulmck@kernel.org, palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, mmaas@google.com, hboehm@google.com,
        striker@us.ibm.com, charlie@rivosinc.com, rehn@rivosinc.com,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] membarrier: riscv: Provide core serializing command
Message-ID: <ZWesWCRAPV3rZlx9@andrea>
References: <20231127103235.28442-1-parri.andrea@gmail.com>
 <20231127103235.28442-3-parri.andrea@gmail.com>
 <91ab0210-07f9-42c4-af7f-a98799250cf7@efficios.com>
 <ZWYDtB/otYvTMZWd@andrea>
 <0a84c0e0-2571-4c7f-82ae-a429f467a16b@efficios.com>
 <ZWeDF0eHyOc/b9UJ@andrea>
 <53aac2ac-46ae-46b8-9fdf-34527b79a63b@efficios.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53aac2ac-46ae-46b8-9fdf-34527b79a63b@efficios.com>
Precedence: bulk

> > As regards the Fixes: tag, I guess it boils down to what we want or we
> > need to take for commit "riscv: Support membarrier private cmd".  :-)
> 
> I'm not seeing this commit in the Linux master branch, am I missing
> something ?

I don't think you're missing something: I was wondering "what/where is
this commit"?  Sorry for the confusion.


> > FWIW, a quick git-log search confirmed that MEMBARRIER has been around
> > for quite some time in the RISC-V world (though I'm not familiar with
> > any of its mainstream uses): commit 1464d00b27b2 says (at least) since
> > 93917ad50972 ("RISC-V: Add support for restartable sequence").  I am
> > currently inclined to pick the latter commit (and check it w/ Palmer),
> > but other suggestions are welcome.
> 
> Supporting membarrier private expedited is not optional since Linux 4.14:
> 
> see kernel/sched/core.c:
> 
>                 membarrier_switch_mm(rq, prev->active_mm, next->mm);
>                 /*
>                  * sys_membarrier() requires an smp_mb() between setting
>                  * rq->curr / membarrier_switch_mm() and returning to userspace.
>                  *
>                  * The below provides this either through switch_mm(), or in
>                  * case 'prev->active_mm == next->mm' through
>                  * finish_task_switch()'s mmdrop().
>                  */
>                 switch_mm_irqs_off(prev->active_mm, next->mm, next);
> 
> Failure to provide the required barrier is a bug in the architecture's
> switch_mm implementation when CONFIG_MEMBARRIER=y.
> 
> We should probably introduce a new
> Documentation/features/sched/membarrier/arch-support.txt
> to clarify this requirement.
> 
> Userspace code such as liburcu [1] heavily relies on membarrier private
> expedited (when available) to speed up RCU read-side critical sections.
> Various DNS servers, including BIND 9, use liburcu.

Thanks for the information.

So I should probably stick to 93917ad50972, which apparently selected
CONFIG_MEMBARRIER on RISC-V, for the Fixes: tag in question.

I'll look into adding the membarrier feature you mention (as a final/
follow-up patch), unless you or someone else want to take care of it.

  Andrea