linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
To: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Jade Alglave <j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk>,
	Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Daniel Kroening <kroening@cs.ox.ac.uk>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Adding plain accesses and detecting data races in the LKMM
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:37:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190419163737.GA8690@andrea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2827195a-f203-b9cd-444d-cf6425cef06f@gmail.com>

> > +     (1) The compiler can reorder the load from a to precede the
> > +     atomic_dec(), (2) Because x86 smp_mb__before_atomic() is only a
> > +     compiler barrier, the CPU can reorder the preceding store to
> > +     obj->dead with the later load from a.
> > +
> > +     This could be avoided by using READ_ONCE(), which would prevent the
> > +     compiler from reordering due to both atomic_dec() and READ_ONCE()
> > +     being volatile accesses, and is usually preferable for loads from
> > +     shared variables.  However, weakly ordered CPUs would still be
> > +     free to reorder the atomic_dec() with the load from a, so a more
> > +     readable option is to also use smp_mb__after_atomic() as follows:
> > +
> > +	WRITE_ONCE(obj->dead, 1);
> > +	smp_mb__before_atomic();
> > +	atomic_dec(&obj->ref_count);
> > +	smp_mb__after_atomic();
> > +	r1 = READ_ONCE(a);
> 
> The point here is not just "readability", but also the portability of the
> code, isn't it?

The implicit assumption was, I guess, that all weakly ordered CPUs which
are free to reorder the atomic_dec() with the READ_ONCE() execute a full
memory barrier in smp_mb__before_atomic() ...  This assumption currently
holds, AFAICT, but yes: it may well become "non-portable"! ... ;-)

  Andrea

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-19 19:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-19 19:38 Adding plain accesses and detecting data races in the LKMM Alan Stern
2019-04-02 14:42 ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-02 18:06   ` Alan Stern
2019-04-06  0:49     ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-06 16:03       ` Alan Stern
2019-04-08  5:51         ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-08 14:18           ` Alan Stern
2019-04-09  1:36             ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-09 15:01               ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-13 21:39                 ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-15 13:35                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-15 13:50                     ` Alan Stern
2019-04-15 13:53                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-18 12:54                     ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-18 17:44                       ` Alan Stern
2019-04-18 18:39                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-18 20:19                           ` Alan Stern
2019-04-19  0:53                         ` Andrea Parri
2019-04-19 12:47                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-19 14:34                             ` Alan Stern
2019-04-19 17:17                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-19 15:06                             ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-04-19 16:37                               ` Andrea Parri [this message]
2019-04-19 18:06                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-04-20 14:50                                 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-04-21 19:38                                   ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20190419163737.GA8690@andrea \
    --to=andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com \
    --cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
    --cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
    --cc=kroening@cs.ox.ac.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --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).