From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBFACC433DF for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 23:04:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4FE82065D for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 23:04:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="QKOMM227"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="q9nHFQUG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B4FE82065D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=EELtw4rdEbPZWHD7k8dPfs8LpGwnDgI3a96d4Fbx0yQ=; b=QKOMM227eVvfL6wufTGFm/JmD 3bBdt/ZUtpo/mqI5QFbbgXW43K0jk6qHPpnEFZlfzfdLaDs14hvM3ZnmU09gjUmAgnKikEWiJVne8 GtnSnsm98/GbQeewOZVOCYXCrUshTRumXJ64OgiOIzdiCLiApKJEnfRuGlMoIFfZ+1H0iWvVCkgCf PRUO5zhT3hyD4ttDR/i5M0VzGHrGWsmIkDIDGbzHL+NOIRayvAJ/fhmUKEJ9Y3pS6y9Qv5VQTU63O RdxFUeuf1N3gcWoIamwNkuIsi8TIYWMvqyv0EOq89JIpJWWsxYTxyJTFrkMwa7ITXyjUa77htADi3 ZBjcBU2jg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jswaw-0007Tu-HR; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:01:46 +0000 Received: from mail-pj1-x1042.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1042]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jswau-0007Sn-4a for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:01:44 +0000 Received: by mail-pj1-x1042.google.com with SMTP id md7so323215pjb.1 for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:01:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Eir+/5D/9eAWW8HAsQF0UHQBLwiWBu8OPWiNvlXrgfo=; b=q9nHFQUGJSQa6+kpaDcgq/H1Me1dz6qWOflJ5qyN8UvbG2KFHaOFsiG0yh3griaGPL zpnFvEKrEBU6SBmCmwnkaiFfGBgE0BfLwr0eTl2JCp/Po7z+8CEmwFIoMC+7xoDrOrRF Peb0k+dE/YvzErpB5rct6JRCG3QiM6DuLuM2j5pxxlqqHQl5MlKR6lNvdR/reBAj+1Be S5+7mSAGbM84lAoSQaE6ExV4twhGu0RrHpWOQdKgGC3bTAmqkuoiThYE+owAp8819Png 2ZtcJDPTpIxlBOEhEyIzU8C7I4ASBxyJ4z2jd+jwdkycWq9tZVcYQ5iQ21gf4m6zXiEC 4ENA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Eir+/5D/9eAWW8HAsQF0UHQBLwiWBu8OPWiNvlXrgfo=; b=dHb2WEqC4leZihtT5Y/850WgaQOP7YO9b1rbr3Qpl8Gs4769caJF38J/WB19fMqoTZ 8rItgG4CkOZoPTG66PcBxvvJ+im7OUK5dFvkbX9eZJ5Gnz652JEgnFl7ZJP9MhzgJiAc QTcTv/Jyd9bL21tlWL28sr9MMnfTZU52ANKwiuegYxw9ZSo2+kS8gc2xvUqCSAbHkQ0f ap1WfaYU9FiwkZsMMsZbKTXYBmuJF+QXnyZ04Z6+asJg+iI4tHrl2REK1YEqKsApBw5b 3fCe1/g5udx6NgoKzhDk9EGJ8yyKtcgpp3eKK67g+VnHdb/gTyUnfsnrR487GqRgYmyX rEEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532aey9fmgcyaSQPeJOtEWCMTdHBNQNa/oiWB0x+SFiRL0fxIIqJ JSpFUmMF/4oPRK8tMGm8zar3vMLPgFl6rDgcNJ0wOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwBfW8b+5wb0y3A65hpMEhCu/FpkdAhiiZU0fRVHBXtqfSUAse8Mqe3LAWxXGm5JXrx3EH2RrhSOLaypQu9ewE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a50c:: with SMTP id s12mr33346815plq.119.1594162900874; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:01:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200630173734.14057-1-will@kernel.org> <20200630173734.14057-19-will@kernel.org> <20200701170722.4rte5ssnmrn2uqzg@bakewell.cambridge.arm.com> <20200702072301.GA15963@willie-the-truck> <20200706160023.GB10992@arm.com> <20200706163455.GV9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200706170556.GE10992@arm.com> <20200706173628.GZ9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200707102915.GI10992@arm.com> <20200707225122.GJ9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> In-Reply-To: <20200707225122.GJ9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> From: Nick Desaulniers Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:01:28 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] arm64: lto: Strengthen READ_ONCE() to acquire when CLANG_LTO=y To: "Paul E. McKenney" , Dave Martin , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon , Sami Tolvanen , Marco Elver X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200707_190144_235948_D98BF886 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 37.04 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , LKML , Kees Cook , Arnd Bergmann , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Catalin Marinas , Jason Wang , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Alan Stern , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Kokshaysky , Matt Turner , kernel-team , Boqun Feng , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org I'm trying to put together a Micro Conference for Linux Plumbers conference focused on "make LLVM slightly less shitty." Do you all plan on attending the conference? Would it be worthwhile to hold a session focused on discussing this (LTO and memory models) be worthwhile? On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 3:51 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 11:29:15AM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 10:36:28AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 06:05:57PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > > [ . . . ] > > > > > The underlying problem here seems to be that the necessary ordering > > > > rule is not part of what passes for the C memory model prior to C11. > > > > If we want to control the data flow, don't we have to wrap the entire > > > > dereference in a macro? > > > > > > Yes, exactly. Because we are relying on things that are not guaranteed > > > by the C memory model, we need to pay attention to the implementations. > > > As I have said elsewhere, the price of control dependencies is eternal > > > vigilance. > > > > > > And this also applies, to a lesser extent, to address and data > > > dependencies, which are also not well supported by the C standard. > > > > > > There is one important case in which the C memory model -does- support > > > control dependencies, and that is when the dependent write is a normal > > > C-language write that is not involved in a data race. In that case, > > > if the compiler broke the control dependency, it might have introduced > > > a data race, which it is forbidden to do. However, this rule can also > > > be broken when the compiler knows too much, as it might be able to prove > > > that breaking the dependency won't introduce a data race. In that case, > > > according to the standard, it is free to break the dependency. > > > > Which only matters because the C abstract machine may not match reality. > > > > LTO has no bearing on the abstract machine though. > > > > If specific compiler options etc. can be added to inhibit the > > problematic optimisations, that would be ideal. I guess that can't > > happen overnight though. > > Sadly, I must agree. > > > > > > > > We likely won't realise if/when this goes wrong, other than impossible to > > > > > > > debug, subtle breakage that crops up seemingly randomly. Ideally, we'd be > > > > > > > able to detect this sort of thing happening at build time, and perhaps > > > > > > > even prevent it with compiler options or annotations, but none of that is > > > > > > > close to being available and I'm keen to progress the LTO patches in the > > > > > > > meantime because they are a requirement for CFI. > > > > > > > > > > > > My concern was not so much why LTO makes things dangerous, as why !LTO > > > > > > makes things safe... > > > > > > > > > > Because ignorant compilers are safe compilers! ;-) > > > > > > > > AFAICT ignorance is no gurantee of ordering in general -- the compiler > > > > is free to speculatively invent knowledge any place that the language > > > > spec allows it to. !LTO doesn't stop this happening. > > > > > > Agreed, according to the standard, the compiler has great freedom. > > > > > > We have two choices: (1) Restrict ourselves to live within the confines of > > > the standard or (2) Pay continued close attention to the implementation. > > > We have made different choices at different times, but for many ordering > > > situations we have gone with door #2. > > > > > > Me, I have been working to get the standard to better support our > > > use case. This is at best slow going. But don't take my word for it, > > > ask Will. > > > > I can believe it. They want to enable optimisations rather than prevent > > them... > > Right in one! ;-) > > > > > Hopefully some of the knowledge I invented in my reply is valid... > > > > > > It is. It is just that there are multiple valid strategies, and the > > > Linux kernel is currently taking a mixed-strategy approach. > > > > Ack. The hope that there is a correct way to fix everything dies > > hard ;) > > Either that, or one slowly degrades ones definition of "correct". :-/ > > > Life was cosier before I started trying to reason about language specs. > > Same here! > > Thanx, Paul -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel