From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, monstr@monstr.eu, git@xilinx.com,
arnd@arndb.de,
Stefan Asserhall load and store <stefan.asserhall@xilinx.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
paulmck@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] microblaze: Do atomic operations by using exclusive ops
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 10:04:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200213100403.GA1405@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200213091651.GA14946@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:16:51AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:58:49AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > The thing is, your bog standard LL/SC _SHOULD_ fail the SC if someone
> > else does a regular store to the same variable. See the example in
> > Documentation/atomic_t.txt.
> >
> > That is, a competing SW/SWI should result in the interconnect responding
> > with something other than EXOKAY, the SWX should fail and MSR[C] <- 1.
>
> The thing is; we have code that relies on this behaviour. There are a
> few crusty SMP archs that sorta-kinda limp along (mostly by disabling
> some of the code and praying the rest doesn't trigger too often), but we
> really should not allow more broken SMP archs.
I did find this in the linked pdf:
| If the store [swx] is successful, the sequence of instructions from
| the semaphore load to the semaphore store appear to be executed
| atomically - no other device modified the semaphore location between
| the read and the update.
which sounds like we're ok, although it could be better worded.
One part I haven't figured out is what happens if you take an interrupt
between the lwx and the swx and whether you can end up succeeding thanks
to somebody else's reservation. Also, the manual is silent about the
interaction with TLB invalidation and just refers to "address" when
talking about the reservation. What happens if a user thread triggers
CoW while another is in the middle of a lwx/swx?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-13 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 15:42 [PATCH 0/7] microblaze: Define SMP safe operations Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 1/7] microblaze: timer: Don't use cpu timer setting Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 2/7] microblaze: Make cpuinfo structure SMP aware Michal Simek
2020-02-12 20:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 3/7] microblaze: Define SMP safe bit operations Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 8:42 ` Michal Simek
2020-02-13 9:01 ` Stefan Asserhall
2020-02-13 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 9:24 ` Stefan Asserhall
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 4/7] microblaze: Add SMP implementation of xchg and cmpxchg Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 5/7] microblaze: Remove disabling IRQ while pte_update() run Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 6/7] microblaze: Implement architecture spinlock Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 7:51 ` Michal Simek
2020-02-13 8:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 15:42 ` [PATCH 7/7] microblaze: Do atomic operations by using exclusive ops Michal Simek
2020-02-12 15:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 8:06 ` Michal Simek
2020-02-13 8:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 10:04 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-02-13 10:14 ` Stefan Asserhall
2020-02-13 10:20 ` Will Deacon
2020-02-13 10:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 11:34 ` Boqun Feng
2020-02-13 11:38 ` Boqun Feng
2020-02-13 13:51 ` Andrea Parri
2020-02-13 14:01 ` Andrea Parri
2020-02-12 16:08 ` [PATCH 0/7] microblaze: Define SMP safe operations Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-12 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 7:49 ` Michal Simek
2020-02-13 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-13 8:12 ` Michal Simek
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=20200213100403.GA1405@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=git@xilinx.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.simek@xilinx.com \
--cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stefan.asserhall@xilinx.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).