linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, sramana@codeaurora.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:33:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170824123304.5pqw53qbsytpfbrp@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170824112927.tqejopswi7mcy4sq@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 01:29:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> WTH did you not Cc the people that commented on your patch last time?
> 
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 04:58:55PM +0530, Prateek Sood wrote:
> > If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
> > rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
> > respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
> > to wakeup being missed.
> 
> >  spinning writer                  up_write caller
> >  ---------------                  -----------------------
> >  [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
> >   spin_lock(wait_lock)
> >   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
> >             +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
> >   count=sem->count
> >   MB
> >                                    sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
> >                                              -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
> >                                    RMB
> 
> This doesn't make sense, it appears to order a STORE against something
> else.
> 
> >                                    spin_trylock(wait_lock)
> >                                    return
> >  rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
> >  spin_unlock(wait_lock)
> >  schedule()

Is this what you wanted to write?

---
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 02f660666ab8..813b5d3654ce 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -613,6 +613,33 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
 	/*
+	 * __rwsem_down_write_failed_common(sem)
+	 *   rwsem_optimistic_spin(sem)
+	 *     osq_unlock(sem->osq)
+	 *   ...
+	 *   atomic_long_add_return(&sem->count)
+	 *
+	 *		- VS -
+	 *
+	 *			__up_write()
+	 *			  if (atomic_long_sub_return_release(&sem->count) < 0)
+	 *			    rwsem_wake(sem)
+	 *			      osq_is_locked(&sem->osq)
+	 *
+	 * And __up_write() must observe !osq_is_locked() when it observes the
+	 * atomic_long_add_return() in order to not miss a wakeup.
+	 *
+	 * This boils down to:
+	 *
+	 * [S.rel] X = 1		[RmW] r0 = (Y += 0)
+	 *	   MB			      RMB
+	 * [RmW]   Y += 1		[L]   r1 = X
+	 *
+	 * exists (r0=1 /\ r1=0)
+	 */
+	smp_rmb();
+
+	/*
 	 * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
 	 * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
 	 * spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-24 12:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-23 11:28 [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load Prateek Sood
2017-08-24 11:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-24 12:33   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-08-24 12:52     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-07 14:08       ` Prateek Sood
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-09-07 14:30 Prateek Sood
2017-09-19 14:05 ` Andrea Parri
2017-09-20 14:52 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-09-20 21:17   ` Andrea Parri
2017-09-27 21:20     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-09-26 18:37 ` Prateek Sood
2017-07-26 20:17 Prateek Sood
2017-07-27 15:48 ` Waiman Long
2017-07-27 16:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-10  8:32   ` Andrea Parri
2017-08-10 10:41     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-10 10:44 ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20170824123304.5pqw53qbsytpfbrp@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=prsood@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=sramana@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).