From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: [RFC v2 1/2] [NEEDS HELP] x86/mm: Handle unlazying membarrier core sync in the arch code
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 21:26:16 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <203d39d11562575fd8bd6a094d97a3a332d8b265.1607059162.git.luto@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1607059162.git.luto@kernel.org>
The core scheduler isn't a great place for
membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode() -- the core scheduler doesn't
actually know whether we are lazy. With the old code, if a CPU is
running a membarrier-registered task, goes idle, gets unlazied via a TLB
shootdown IPI, and switches back to the membarrier-registered task, it
will do an unnecessary core sync.
Conveniently, x86 is the only architecture that does anything in this
hook, so we can just move the code.
XXX: there are some comments in swich_mm_irqs_off() that seem to be
trying to document what barriers are expected, and it's not clear to me
that these barriers are actually present in all paths through the
code. So I think this change makes the code more comprehensible and
has no effect on the code's correctness, but I'm not at all convinced
that the code is correct.
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
---
arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
kernel/sched/core.c | 14 +++++++-------
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
index 3338a1feccf9..23df035b80e8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
#include <linux/export.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/debugfs.h>
+#include <linux/sched/mm.h>
#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
@@ -496,6 +497,8 @@ void switch_mm_irqs_off(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
* from one thread in a process to another thread in the same
* process. No TLB flush required.
*/
+
+ // XXX: why is this okay wrt membarrier?
if (!was_lazy)
return;
@@ -508,12 +511,24 @@ void switch_mm_irqs_off(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
smp_mb();
next_tlb_gen = atomic64_read(&next->context.tlb_gen);
if (this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.ctxs[prev_asid].tlb_gen) ==
- next_tlb_gen)
+ next_tlb_gen) {
+ /*
+ * We're reactivating an mm, and membarrier might
+ * need to serialize. Tell membarrier.
+ */
+
+ // XXX: I can't understand the logic in
+ // membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(). What's
+ // the mm check for?
+ membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(next);
return;
+ }
/*
* TLB contents went out of date while we were in lazy
* mode. Fall through to the TLB switching code below.
+ * No need for an explicit membarrier invocation -- the CR3
+ * write will serialize.
*/
new_asid = prev_asid;
need_flush = true;
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 2d95dc3f4644..6c4b76147166 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3619,22 +3619,22 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
kcov_finish_switch(current);
fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
+
/*
* When switching through a kernel thread, the loop in
* membarrier_{private,global}_expedited() may have observed that
* kernel thread and not issued an IPI. It is therefore possible to
* schedule between user->kernel->user threads without passing though
* switch_mm(). Membarrier requires a barrier after storing to
- * rq->curr, before returning to userspace, so provide them here:
+ * rq->curr, before returning to userspace, and mmdrop() provides
+ * this barrier.
*
- * - a full memory barrier for {PRIVATE,GLOBAL}_EXPEDITED, implicitly
- * provided by mmdrop(),
- * - a sync_core for SYNC_CORE.
+ * XXX: I don't think mmdrop() actually does this. There's no
+ * smp_mb__before/after_atomic() in there.
*/
- if (mm) {
- membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(mm);
+ if (mm)
mmdrop(mm);
- }
+
if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
if (prev->sched_class->task_dead)
prev->sched_class->task_dead(prev);
--
2.28.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-04 5:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-04 5:26 [RFC v2 0/2] lazy mm refcounting Andy Lutomirski
2020-12-04 5:26 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2020-12-04 7:06 ` [RFC v2 1/2] [NEEDS HELP] x86/mm: Handle unlazying membarrier core sync in the arch code Nicholas Piggin
2020-12-04 8:17 ` Nadav Amit
2020-12-04 20:39 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-12-04 20:24 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2020-12-04 5:26 ` [RFC v2 2/2] [MOCKUP] sched/mm: Lightweight lazy mm refcounting Andy Lutomirski
2020-12-04 7:54 ` Nicholas Piggin
2020-12-04 14:37 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-12-05 4:49 ` Nicholas Piggin
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=203d39d11562575fd8bd6a094d97a3a332d8b265.1607059162.git.luto@kernel.org \
--to=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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).