LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load
@ 2017-08-23 11:28 Prateek Sood
  2017-08-24 11:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Prateek Sood @ 2017-08-23 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: peterz, mingo; +Cc: Prateek Sood, sramana, linux-kernel

If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
to wakeup being missed.
 spinning writer                  up_write caller
 ---------------                  -----------------------
 [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
  spin_lock(wait_lock)
  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
  count=sem->count
  MB
                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
                                   RMB
                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
                                   return
 rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
 spin_unlock(wait_lock)
 schedule()

Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().

The smp_rmb() will make sure that the spinner state is
consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
---
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 34e727f..5c687f6 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -586,6 +586,51 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
 	/*
+	 * If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
+	 * rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
+	 * respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
+	 * to wakeup being missed.
+	 *
+	 * spinning writer                  up_write caller
+	 * ---------------                  -----------------------
+	 * [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
+	 *  spin_lock(wait_lock)
+	 *  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
+	 *            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
+	 *  count=sem->count
+	 *  MB
+	 *                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
+	 *                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
+	 *                                   RMB
+	 *                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
+	 *                                   return
+	 * rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
+	 * spin_unlock(wait_lock)
+	 * schedule()
+	 *
+	 * Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
+	 * and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
+	 * wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
+	 * and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
+	 * in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
+	 * writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().
+	 *
+	 *
+	 * The RMB in below example is to make sure that the spinner state is
+	 * consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.
+	 * This would guarantee trylock on rwsem is successful
+	 * in rwsem_down_write_failed().
+	 * spinning writer                  up_write caller
+	 * ---------------                  -----------------------
+	 * [S] osq_unlock()                 atomic_update(sem->count)
+	 *                                  RMB
+	 * atomic_update(sem->count)        [L] osq
+	 * MB
+	 * rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
+	 */
+	smp_rmb();
+
+	/*
 	 * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
 	 * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
 	 * spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., 
is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load
@ 2017-09-07 14:30 Prateek Sood
  2017-09-19 14:05 ` Andrea Parri
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Prateek Sood @ 2017-09-07 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mingo, longman, peterz, parri.andrea, dave
  Cc: Prateek Sood, linux-kernel, sramana

If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
to wakeup being missed.

 spinning writer                  up_write caller
 ---------------                  -----------------------
 [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
  spin_lock(wait_lock)
  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
  count=sem->count
  MB
                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
                                   return
 rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
 spin_unlock(wait_lock)
 schedule()

Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().

The smp_rmb() will make sure that the spinner state is
consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
---
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 02f6606..1fefe6d 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -613,6 +613,33 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
 	/*
+	* __rwsem_down_write_failed_common(sem)
+	*   rwsem_optimistic_spin(sem)
+	*     osq_unlock(sem->osq)
+	*   ...
+	*   atomic_long_add_return(&sem->count)
+	*
+	*      - VS -
+	*
+	*              __up_write()
+	*                if (atomic_long_sub_return_release(&sem->count) < 0)
+	*                  rwsem_wake(sem)
+	*                    osq_is_locked(&sem->osq)
+	*
+	* And __up_write() must observe !osq_is_locked() when it observes the
+	* atomic_long_add_return() in order to not miss a wakeup.
+	*
+	* This boils down to:
+	*
+	* [S.rel] X = 1                [RmW] r0 = (Y += 0)
+	*         MB                         RMB
+	* [RmW]   Y += 1               [L]   r1 = X
+	*
+	* exists (r0=1 /\ r1=0)
+	*/
+	smp_rmb();
+
+	/*
 	 * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
 	 * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
 	 * spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., 
is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load
@ 2017-07-26 20:17 Prateek Sood
  2017-07-27 15:48 ` Waiman Long
  2017-08-10 10:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Prateek Sood @ 2017-07-26 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: peterz, mingo; +Cc: Prateek Sood, sramana, linux-kernel

If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
to wakeup being missed.

 spinning writer                  up_write caller
 ---------------                  -----------------------
 [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
  spin_lock(wait_lock)
  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
  count=sem->count
  MB
                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
                                   return
 rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
 spin_unlock(wait_lock)
 schedule()

Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().

The smp_rmb() will make sure that the spinner state is
consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.

Signed-off-by: Prateek Sood <prsood@codeaurora.org>
---
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 34e727f..21c111a 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -585,6 +585,40 @@ struct rw_semaphore *rwsem_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	unsigned long flags;
 	DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
+        /*
+         * If a spinner is present, there is a chance that the load of
+         * rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can be reordered with
+         * respect to decrement of rwsem count in __up_write() leading
+         * to wakeup being missed.
+         *
+         * spinning writer                  up_write caller
+         * ---------------                  -----------------------
+         * [S] osq_unlock()                 [L] osq
+         *  spin_lock(wait_lock)
+         *  sem->count=0xFFFFFFFF00000001
+         *            +0xFFFFFFFF00000000
+         *  count=sem->count
+         *  MB
+         *                                   sem->count=0xFFFFFFFE00000001
+         *                                             -0xFFFFFFFF00000001
+         *                                   spin_trylock(wait_lock)
+         *                                   return
+         * rwsem_try_write_lock(count)
+         * spin_unlock(wait_lock)
+         * schedule()
+         *
+         * Reordering of atomic_long_sub_return_release() in __up_write()
+         * and rwsem_has_spinner() in rwsem_wake() can cause missing of
+         * wakeup in up_write() context. In spinning writer, sem->count
+         * and local variable count is 0XFFFFFFFE00000001. It would result
+         * in rwsem_try_write_lock() failing to acquire rwsem and spinning
+         * writer going to sleep in rwsem_down_write_failed().
+         *
+         * The smp_rmb() here is to make sure that the spinner state is
+         * consulted after sem->count is updated in up_write context.
+         */
+        smp_rmb();
+
 	/*
 	 * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
 	 * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., 
is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-08-23 11:28 [PATCH] rwsem: fix missed wakeup due to reordering of load Prateek Sood
2017-08-24 11:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-24 12:33   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-24 12:52     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-07 14:08       ` Prateek Sood
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-09-07 14:30 Prateek Sood
2017-09-19 14:05 ` Andrea Parri
2017-09-20 14:52 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-09-20 21:17   ` Andrea Parri
2017-09-27 21:20     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-09-26 18:37 ` Prateek Sood
2017-07-26 20:17 Prateek Sood
2017-07-27 15:48 ` Waiman Long
2017-07-27 16:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-10  8:32   ` Andrea Parri
2017-08-10 10:41     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-10 10:44 ` Peter Zijlstra

LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0 lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1 lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2 lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3 lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4 lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5 lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6 lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7 lkml/git/7.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8 lkml/git/8.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml \
		linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index lkml

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git