All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds()
Date: Tue,  3 May 2011 20:11:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1304478708-1273-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> (raw)

From: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>

So get_seconds() has always been lock free, with the assumption
that accessing a long will be atomic.

However, recently I came across an odd bug where time() access could
occasionally be inconsistent, but only on power7 hardware. The
same code paths on power6 or x86 could not reproduce the issue.

After adding careful debugging checks to any xtime manipulation, and
not seeing any inconsistencies on the kernel side, I realized that
with no locking in the get_seconds path, its could be that two
sequential calls to time() could be executed out of order on newer
hardware, causing the inconsistency to appear in userland.

After adding the following locking, the issue cannot be reproduced.

Wanted to run this by the power guys to make sure the theory above
sounds sane.

CC: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
CC: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/time/timekeeping.c |   10 +++++++++-
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index 8ad5d57..89c7582 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -975,7 +975,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(monotonic_to_bootbased);
 
 unsigned long get_seconds(void)
 {
-	return xtime.tv_sec;
+	unsigned long seq, now;
+
+	do {
+		seq = read_seqbegin(&xtime_lock);
+
+		now = xtime.tv_sec;
+	} while (read_seqretry(&xtime_lock, seq));
+
+	return now;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_seconds);
 
-- 
1.7.3.2.146.gca209


             reply	other threads:[~2011-05-04  3:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-04  3:11 John Stultz [this message]
2011-05-04  3:52 ` [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds() Andi Kleen
2011-05-05  2:54   ` john stultz
2011-05-05  5:44     ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05  6:21       ` john stultz
2011-05-05  6:50         ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05  8:14         ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-05-05 18:51           ` john stultz
2011-05-05 14:04         ` [RFC] time: xtime_lock is held too long Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 14:39           ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-05 15:08             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 15:59               ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-05 21:01                 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06  1:41                   ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06  6:55                     ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 10:18                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-06 10:22                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-06 16:53                       ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-07  8:20                         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-06 16:59                     ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 17:09                       ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 17:17                         ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 17:42                       ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 17:50                         ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 19:26                           ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 20:04                             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 20:24                               ` john stultz
2011-05-06 22:30                                 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 22:46                                   ` john stultz
2011-05-06 23:00                                     ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-06 23:28                                       ` john stultz
2011-05-07  5:02                                         ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-07  7:11                                           ` Henrik Rydberg
2011-05-09  8:40                                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-12  9:13                                         ` [PATCH] seqlock: don't smp_rmb in seqlock reader spin loop, [PATCH] seqlock: don't smp_rmb in seqlock reader spin loop Milton Miller
2011-05-12  9:13                                           ` Milton Miller
2011-05-12  9:35                                           ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-12  9:35                                             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-12 14:08                                           ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-12 14:08                                             ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-06 20:18                         ` [RFC] time: xtime_lock is held too long john stultz
2011-05-05 17:57     ` [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds() Andi Kleen
2011-05-05 20:17       ` john stultz
2011-05-05 20:24         ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 20:40           ` john stultz
2011-05-05 20:43             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-05 20:56         ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-04 16:51 ` Max Asbock
2011-05-04 21:05   ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-04 23:05   ` john stultz

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=1304478708-1273-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.