Received: by 10.223.164.202 with SMTP id h10csp328779wrb; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:57:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbUAlUhqaBOr878eOBheVzmGNLZnziW4AqT8t65c8O1qsinArCky9ZSlAYhNDMrcEBM60Q6 X-Received: by 10.99.123.14 with SMTP id w14mr12586649pgc.172.1510732658749; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:57:38 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1510732658; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=eCdnAIRy9uiOTMQRtBCzJYHkBR50kZh7RTATIsIcI5yO/XmuLD4d0eQexSh6paRgQ1 aVcADMJiYFbmyN6PhpLXdwE/GEGF3kiqcdHzByitt+ovpQYI4rw6V4FCHm1emSKMR3JJ hA1tXYCaP3l/tIDcT2HPcum16usUgKqs1UwrIJWfCN6SpuvbfI5YEArZrGGgXR5ZqGZO yGz+Al7HUkUvzQ43teddQdtjdBLq2uq56a57WhUOaf6bQtNae7R86DQgfNbHVeWBs870 Z/9p4SKsRRE2AZ53legB7t/iTIvauGuzvhMQ60/9ipDUk6HltLKa3AokLkr9OvzAeCgu bNwA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:references:in-reply-to:message-id:date :subject:cc:to:from:arc-authentication-results; bh=9LHERRz2VfpWDbjbKuV7gevINakaBnOcYs4Tu3uQMoM=; b=q0JyOylmesegehehu/FM/uglD220PCRlMMsHgM/KR15tDcnxSMPSBqyCVjcqiSHxEb okfgonyyLd1wD5vSso5QlU9i6NYHviqwSRnoIbt5wHnhmituU75OvQOR48Rv/yyWXcPT 7s3GXCrAskLalHvfu8X+ozNlLY6pl6Hg+ZXexk13ElDL+kaqnm1GFwg0bsfcfuAcQRoi F/3OkWnrkvNy5RjY1gnG6IrGweHcU32U2Bw8a4mNExmUFEACFT8NYbAFWEtMs4GbIKhM agUkUaBghzBaa9U2KOYw/MXypbtu3hJGDKCDIMcajK8Atnh4NohKXqPDKztTTiwsUzHb bAWQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; 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 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id bh1si17445035plb.93.2017.11.14.23.57.26; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:57:38 -0800 (PST) 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; 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 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756231AbdKOH4R (ORCPT + 88 others); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:56:17 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:47218 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755287AbdKOH4B (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:56:01 -0500 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Nov 2017 23:56:00 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,398,1505804400"; d="scan'208";a="2834811" Received: from elena-thinkpad-x230.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.87]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Nov 2017 23:55:56 -0800 From: Elena Reshetova To: peterz@infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, keescook@chromium.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, ishkamiel@gmail.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, Elena Reshetova Subject: [PATCH] refcount_t: documentation for memory ordering differences Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 09:55:51 +0200 Message-Id: <1510732551-25547-2-git-send-email-elena.reshetova@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 In-Reply-To: <1510732551-25547-1-git-send-email-elena.reshetova@intel.com> References: <1510732551-25547-1-git-send-email-elena.reshetova@intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Some functions from refcount_t API provide different memory ordering guarantees that their atomic counterparts. This adds a document outlining these differences. Signed-off-by: Elena Reshetova --- Documentation/refcount-vs-atomic.txt | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 124 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/refcount-vs-atomic.txt diff --git a/Documentation/refcount-vs-atomic.txt b/Documentation/refcount-vs-atomic.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e703039 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/refcount-vs-atomic.txt @@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ +================================== +refcount_t API compare to atomic_t +================================== + +The goal of refcount_t API is to provide a minimal API for implementing +object's reference counters. While a generic architecture-independent +implementation from lib/refcount.c uses atomic operations underneath, +there are a number of differences between some of the refcount_*() and +atomic_*() functions with regards to the memory ordering guarantees. +This document outlines the differences and provides respective examples +in order to help maintainers validate their code against the change in +these memory ordering guarantees. + +memory-barriers.txt and atomic_t.txt provide more background to the +memory ordering in general and for atomic operations specifically. + +Notation +======== + +An absence of memory ordering guarantees (i.e. fully unordered) +in case of atomics & refcounters only provides atomicity and +program order (po) relation (on the same CPU). It guarantees that +each atomic_*() and refcount_*() operation is atomic and instructions +are executed in program order on a single CPU. +Implemented using READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() and +compare-and-swap primitives. + +A strong (full) memory ordering guarantees that all prior loads and +stores (all po-earlier instructions) on the same CPU are completed +before any po-later instruction is executed on the same CPU. +It also guarantees that all po-earlier stores on the same CPU +and all propagated stores from other CPUs must propagate to all +other CPUs before any po-later instruction is executed on the original +CPU (A-cumulative property). Implemented using smp_mb(). + +A RELEASE memory ordering guarantees that all prior loads and +stores (all po-earlier instructions) on the same CPU are completed +before the operation. It also guarantees that all po-earlier +stores on the same CPU and all propagated stores from other CPUs +must propagate to all other CPUs before the release operation +(A-cumulative property). Implemented using smp_store_release(). + +A control dependency (on success) for refcounters guarantees that +if a reference for an object was successfully obtained (reference +counter increment or addition happened, function returned true), +then further stores are ordered against this operation. +Control dependency on stores are not implemented using any explicit +barriers, but rely on CPU not to speculate on stores. This is only +a single CPU relation and provides no guarantees for other CPUs. + + +Comparison of functions +========================== + +case 1) - non-RMW ops +--------------------- + +Function changes: + atomic_set() --> refcount_set() + atomic_read() --> refcount_read() + +Memory ordering guarantee changes: + fully unordered --> fully unordered + +case 2) - increment-based ops that return no value +-------------------------------------------------- + +Function changes: + atomic_inc() --> refcount_inc() + atomic_add() --> refcount_add() + +Memory ordering guarantee changes: + fully unordered --> fully unordered + + +case 3) - decrement-based RMW ops that return no value +------------------------------------------------------ +Function changes: + atomic_dec() --> refcount_dec() + +Memory ordering guarantee changes: + fully unordered --> RELEASE ordering + + +case 4) - increment-based RMW ops that return a value +----------------------------------------------------- + +Function changes: + atomic_inc_not_zero() --> refcount_inc_not_zero() + no atomic counterpart --> refcount_add_not_zero() + +Memory ordering guarantees changes: + fully ordered --> control dependency on success for stores + +*Note*: we really assume here that necessary ordering is provided as a result +of obtaining pointer to the object! + + +case 5) - decrement-based RMW ops that return a value +----------------------------------------------------- + +Function changes: + atomic_dec_and_test() --> refcount_dec_and_test() + atomic_sub_and_test() --> refcount_sub_and_test() + no atomic counterpart --> refcount_dec_if_one() + atomic_add_unless(&var, -1, 1) --> refcount_dec_not_one(&var) + +Memory ordering guarantees changes: + fully ordered --> RELEASE ordering + control dependency + +Note: atomic_add_unless() only provides full order on success. + + +case 6) - lock-based RMW +------------------------ + +Function changes: + + atomic_dec_and_lock() --> refcount_dec_and_lock() + atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock() --> refcount_dec_and_mutex_lock() + +Memory ordering guarantees changes: + fully ordered --> RELEASE ordering + control dependency + + hold spin_lock() on success -- 2.7.4 From 1585425624002957953@xxx Wed Nov 29 18:21:38 +0000 2017 X-GM-THRID: 1585425624002957953 X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread