linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [v2] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock_wait()
Date: Mon,  6 Jun 2016 14:52:05 +1000 (AEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3rNMkF2Y1sz9t4P@ozlabs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160603034948.17589-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com>

On Fri, 2016-03-06 at 03:49:48 UTC, Boqun Feng wrote:
> There is an ordering issue with spin_unlock_wait() on powerpc, because
> the spin_lock primitive is an ACQUIRE and an ACQUIRE is only ordering
> the load part of the operation with memory operations following it.

...
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 523673d7583c..2ed893662866 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -162,12 +181,23 @@ static inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
>  	lock->slock = 0;
>  }
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> -extern void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock);
> -#else
> -#define arch_spin_unlock_wait(lock) \
> -	do { while (arch_spin_is_locked(lock)) cpu_relax(); } while (0)
> -#endif
> +static inline void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> +	smp_mb();
> +
> +	if (!arch_spin_is_locked_sync(lock))
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	while (!arch_spin_value_unlocked(*lock)) {
> +		HMT_low();
> +		if (SHARED_PROCESSOR)
> +			__spin_yield(lock);
> +	}
> +	HMT_medium();
> +
> +out:
> +	smp_mb();
> +}

I think this would actually be easier to follow if it was all just in one routine:

static inline void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
	arch_spinlock_t lock_val;

	smp_mb();

	/*
	 * Atomically load and store back the lock value (unchanged). This
	 * ensures that our observation of the lock value is ordered with
	 * respect to other lock operations.
	 */
	__asm__ __volatile__(
"1:	" PPC_LWARX(%0, 0, %2, 1) "\n"
"	stwcx. %0, 0, %2\n"
"	bne- 1b\n"
	: "=&r" (lock_val), "+m" (*lock)
	: "r" (lock)
	: "cr0", "xer");

	if (arch_spin_value_unlocked(lock_val))
		goto out;

	while (!arch_spin_value_unlocked(*lock)) {
		HMT_low();
		if (SHARED_PROCESSOR)
			__spin_yield(lock);
	}
	HMT_medium();

out:
	smp_mb();
}


Thoughts?

cheers

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-06  4:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-03  3:49 [PATCH v2] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock_wait() Boqun Feng
2016-06-06  4:52 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2016-06-06  4:59   ` [v2] " Boqun Feng
2016-06-06 11:14 ` Michael Ellerman

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=3rNMkF2Y1sz9t4P@ozlabs.org \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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).