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=-17.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_GIT,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham 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 C7749CA9ED3 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82AEC217F4 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="FhPDq8Y8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 82AEC217F4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 339656B0269; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:29:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 311556B026A; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:29:11 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 13F8E6B026B; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:29:11 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0149.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.149]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5446B0269 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:29:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin05.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A3F071269 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:29:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76118827260.05.twist11_6d2981bb27707 X-HE-Tag: twist11_6d2981bb27707 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5735 Received: from mail-vs1-f73.google.com (mail-vs1-f73.google.com [209.85.217.73]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 14:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-f73.google.com with SMTP id z19so2790619vso.19 for ; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 06:29:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:from:to :cc; bh=sQU0jAVefneuTdQpIgbUF6GdSN4TcMOiQRxRVI16Vls=; b=FhPDq8Y8jgh3GaqH19Ri5l4th6SIgrfB5k6uYp6Qe1zCUALU5Q1h777JkPDXGoqtF+ rUVB4HT5dCMdMd/+svGvi1KkuFsbojwRCgfaJkdh2DPMBB53CrCa1TeF/tRilzh/U2Vv rC8CcHxh3PrEaKH9Qc4nO5dN6oULNuw2D+ebZe/2C78pc5pykjiO0Bg4leEG7yFIFNxI lT1Onq8IrfB98Hhn323WbkEF/3JHPJUZwZzMucC6nWXt4j1r7WLeMRYJuLt6zhN4vW9Q 0cZ7MGwIvE1QsZGodu2uWGo2OqoLsx5v5yIqO4x8fyNCQ7jT/uIEts0ZzNEU0DdB7OYH Ef0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=sQU0jAVefneuTdQpIgbUF6GdSN4TcMOiQRxRVI16Vls=; b=Mqw9CtC/VD8Cgq1S+6ZIOsxEb/Rqmhhx5FEkxOBRd9940dYmDw76adKrLJ5o33URmP Xt+CqGJG9MHYLhH72ZjlsN50aPl88Mqg9dWjXFBBXs9QBxk0H4k/G1Hf+mlrj2Yw7J0m OBRuTttx9zRCGCyU5Iof27yREliE/KVJs/mH1EX9hQueT4e74KbWQbdN8tkYibiVl2d4 xhnI2xQ14T/0QI2v3Wj/l3wnb1bIAemUSPacigbInXjoyNrb73vMNe7yHHVdchvlOudZ Uy+S8yfVFSwhavGzsG4bFKTwK5NPyevz0PsxZu1DV67wfdSp9ikNbo0UrdZJFCpRWihb +pmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUgbEtjy0YuEio5ZBkFZ54PJmSI6OL+ZkA+8R6RvHfgCUg/uGkH GX8mtnhhnEcbILJbAJyvjVp6SyclKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxZ17ci8UfBwQliZ986Aa6FaGmsNO4/Ie/63JBd/SxBBgXy0wxlK6hBzj3ifIPGT1Jnqi5jP2CEFw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:2c7:: with SMTP id k7mr10982783vki.97.1572877749135; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 06:29:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:27:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20191104142745.14722-1-elver@google.com> Message-Id: <20191104142745.14722-7-elver@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20191104142745.14722-1-elver@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.24.0.rc1.363.gb1bccd3e3d-goog Subject: [PATCH v3 6/9] seqlock: Require WRITE_ONCE surrounding raw_seqcount_barrier From: Marco Elver To: elver@google.com Cc: akiyks@gmail.com, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, glider@google.com, parri.andrea@gmail.com, andreyknvl@google.com, luto@kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, arnd@arndb.de, boqun.feng@gmail.com, bp@alien8.de, dja@axtens.net, dlustig@nvidia.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dhowells@redhat.com, dvyukov@google.com, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, joel@joelfernandes.org, corbet@lwn.net, jpoimboe@redhat.com, luc.maranget@inria.fr, mark.rutland@arm.com, npiggin@gmail.com, paulmck@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: This patch proposes to require marked atomic accesses surrounding raw_write_seqcount_barrier. We reason that otherwise there is no way to guarantee propagation nor atomicity of writes before/after the barrier [1]. For example, consider the compiler tears stores either before or after the barrier; in this case, readers may observe a partial value, and because readers are unaware that writes are going on (writes are not in a seq-writer critical section), will complete the seq-reader critical section while having observed some partial state. [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/793253/ This came up when designing and implementing KCSAN, because KCSAN would flag these accesses as data-races. After careful analysis, our reasoning as above led us to conclude that the best thing to do is to propose an amendment to the raw_seqcount_barrier usage. Signed-off-by: Marco Elver --- v3: * Add missing comment that was in preceding seqlock patch. --- include/linux/seqlock.h | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/seqlock.h b/include/linux/seqlock.h index 61232bc223fd..f52c91be8939 100644 --- a/include/linux/seqlock.h +++ b/include/linux/seqlock.h @@ -265,6 +265,13 @@ static inline void raw_write_seqcount_end(seqcount_t *s) * usual consistency guarantee. It is one wmb cheaper, because we can * collapse the two back-to-back wmb()s. * + * Note that, writes surrounding the barrier should be declared atomic (e.g. + * via WRITE_ONCE): a) to ensure the writes become visible to other threads + * atomically, avoiding compiler optimizations; b) to document which writes are + * meant to propagate to the reader critical section. This is necessary because + * neither writes before and after the barrier are enclosed in a seq-writer + * critical section that would ensure readers are aware of ongoing writes. + * * seqcount_t seq; * bool X = true, Y = false; * @@ -284,11 +291,11 @@ static inline void raw_write_seqcount_end(seqcount_t *s) * * void write(void) * { - * Y = true; + * WRITE_ONCE(Y, true); * * raw_write_seqcount_barrier(seq); * - * X = false; + * WRITE_ONCE(X, false); * } */ static inline void raw_write_seqcount_barrier(seqcount_t *s) -- 2.24.0.rc1.363.gb1bccd3e3d-goog