linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 1/6] powerpc: atomic: Make *xchg and *cmpxchg a full barrier
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:19:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151014201916.GB3910@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1444838161-17209-2-git-send-email-boqun.feng@gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:55:56PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg, cmpxchg and their atomic{,64}_
> versions all need to imply a full barrier, however they are now just
> RELEASE+ACQUIRE, which is not a full barrier.
> 
> So replace PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER and PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER with
> PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER and PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER in
> __{cmp,}xchg_{u32,u64} respectively to guarantee a full barrier
> semantics of atomic{,64}_{cmp,}xchg() and {cmp,}xchg().
> 
> This patch is a complement of commit b97021f85517 ("powerpc: Fix
> atomic_xxx_return barrier semantics").
> 
> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.4+
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> index ad6263c..d1a8d93 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> @@ -18,12 +18,12 @@ __xchg_u32(volatile void *p, unsigned long val)
>  	unsigned long prev;
> 
>  	__asm__ __volatile__(
> -	PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER

This looks to be the lwsync instruction.

>  "1:	lwarx	%0,0,%2 \n"
>  	PPC405_ERR77(0,%2)
>  "	stwcx.	%3,0,%2 \n\
>  	bne-	1b"
> -	PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER

And this looks to be the sync instruction.

>  	: "=&r" (prev), "+m" (*(volatile unsigned int *)p)
>  	: "r" (p), "r" (val)
>  	: "cc", "memory");

Hmmm...

Suppose we have something like the following, where "a" and "x" are both
initially zero:

	CPU 0				CPU 1
	-----				-----

	WRITE_ONCE(x, 1);		WRITE_ONCE(a, 2);
	r3 = xchg(&a, 1);		smp_mb();
					r3 = READ_ONCE(x);

If xchg() is fully ordered, we should never observe both CPUs'
r3 values being zero, correct?

And wouldn't this be represented by the following litmus test?

	PPC SB+lwsync-RMW2-lwsync+st-sync-leading
	""
	{
	0:r1=1; 0:r2=x; 0:r3=3; 0:r10=0 ; 0:r11=0; 0:r12=a;
	1:r1=2; 1:r2=x; 1:r3=3; 1:r10=0 ; 1:r11=0; 1:r12=a;
	}
	 P0                 | P1                 ;
	 stw r1,0(r2)       | stw r1,0(r12)      ;
	 lwsync             | sync               ;
	 lwarx  r11,r10,r12 | lwz r3,0(r2)       ;
	 stwcx. r1,r10,r12  | ;
	 bne Fail0          | ;
	 mr r3,r11          | ;
	 Fail0:             | ;
	exists
	(0:r3=0 /\ a=2 /\ 1:r3=0)

I left off P0's trailing sync because there is nothing for it to order
against in this particular litmus test.  I tried adding it and verified
that it has no effect.

Am I missing something here?  If not, it seems to me that you need
the leading lwsync to instead be a sync.

Of course, if I am not missing something, then this applies also to the
value-returning RMW atomic operations that you pulled this pattern from.
If so, it would seem that I didn't think through all the possibilities
back when PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER moved to sync...  In fact, I believe
that I worried about the RMW atomic operation acting as a barrier,
but not as the load/store itself.  :-/

							Thanx, Paul

> @@ -61,12 +61,12 @@ __xchg_u64(volatile void *p, unsigned long val)
>  	unsigned long prev;
> 
>  	__asm__ __volatile__(
> -	PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER
>  "1:	ldarx	%0,0,%2 \n"
>  	PPC405_ERR77(0,%2)
>  "	stdcx.	%3,0,%2 \n\
>  	bne-	1b"
> -	PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER
>  	: "=&r" (prev), "+m" (*(volatile unsigned long *)p)
>  	: "r" (p), "r" (val)
>  	: "cc", "memory");
> @@ -151,14 +151,14 @@ __cmpxchg_u32(volatile unsigned int *p, unsigned long old, unsigned long new)
>  	unsigned int prev;
> 
>  	__asm__ __volatile__ (
> -	PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER
>  "1:	lwarx	%0,0,%2		# __cmpxchg_u32\n\
>  	cmpw	0,%0,%3\n\
>  	bne-	2f\n"
>  	PPC405_ERR77(0,%2)
>  "	stwcx.	%4,0,%2\n\
>  	bne-	1b"
> -	PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER
>  	"\n\
>  2:"
>  	: "=&r" (prev), "+m" (*p)
> @@ -197,13 +197,13 @@ __cmpxchg_u64(volatile unsigned long *p, unsigned long old, unsigned long new)
>  	unsigned long prev;
> 
>  	__asm__ __volatile__ (
> -	PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER
>  "1:	ldarx	%0,0,%2		# __cmpxchg_u64\n\
>  	cmpd	0,%0,%3\n\
>  	bne-	2f\n\
>  	stdcx.	%4,0,%2\n\
>  	bne-	1b"
> -	PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER
> +	PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER
>  	"\n\
>  2:"
>  	: "=&r" (prev), "+m" (*p)
> -- 
> 2.5.3
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-14 20:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-14 15:55 [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 0/6] atomics: powerpc: Implement relaxed/acquire/release variants of some atomics Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:55 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 1/6] powerpc: atomic: Make *xchg and *cmpxchg a full barrier Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 20:19   ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-10-14 21:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 21:44       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15  0:53         ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15  1:22           ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15  3:07             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15  3:07           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15  4:48             ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15 16:30               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-19  0:19                 ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15  3:11           ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15  3:33             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15 10:35         ` Will Deacon
2015-10-15 14:40           ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15 14:50           ` Will Deacon
2015-10-15 16:29             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15 15:42           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-15 14:49     ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-15 16:16       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-20  7:15     ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-20  9:21       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-20 21:28         ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-21  8:18           ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-21 19:36             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-26  2:06               ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-26  2:20               ` Michael Ellerman
2015-10-26  8:55                 ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-26  3:20             ` Paul Mackerras
2015-10-26  8:58               ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-21  8:45           ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-21 19:35             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-21 19:48               ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-22 12:07                 ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-24 10:26                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-24 11:53                     ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-25 13:14                       ` Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:55 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 2/6] atomics: Add test for atomic operations with _relaxed variants Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:55 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 3/6] atomics: Allow architectures to define their own __atomic_op_* helpers Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:55 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 4/6] powerpc: atomic: Implement atomic{,64}_*_return_* variants Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:56 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 5/6] powerpc: atomic: Implement xchg_* and atomic{,64}_xchg_* variants Boqun Feng
2015-10-14 15:56 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v4 6/6] powerpc: atomic: Implement cmpxchg{,64}_* and atomic{,64}_cmpxchg_* variants Boqun Feng

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=20151014201916.GB3910@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=waiman.long@hp.com \
    --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).