linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	John Dias <joaodias@google.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: fix is_pinnable_page against on cma page
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220517202115.GE1790663@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b6eef200-43d1-7913-21ed-176b05fcb4fe@nvidia.com>

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 01:12:02PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 5/17/22 12:28, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > If you compare this to the snippet above, you'll see that there is
> > > an extra mov statement, and that one dereferences a pointer from
> > > %rax:
> > > 
> > >      mov    (%rax),%rbx
> > 
> > That is the same move as:
> > 
> >     mov    0x8(%rdx,%rax,8),%rbx
> > 
> > Except that the EA calculation was done in advance and stored in rax.
> > 
> > lea isn't a memory reference, it is just computing the pointer value
> > that 0x8(%rdx,%rax,8) represents. ie the lea computes
> > 
> >    %rax = %rdx + %rax*8 + 6
> > 
> > Which is then fed into the mov. Maybe it is an optimization to allow
> > one pipe to do the shr and an other to the EA - IDK, seems like a
> > random thing for the compiler to do.

Maybe an optimization suppressed due to the volatile nature of the
load?  If so, perhaps it might be considered a compiler bug.  Though
it is quite difficult to get optimization bugs involving volatile
to be taken seriously.

> Apologies for getting that wrong, and thanks for walking me through the
> asm.
> 
> [...]
> > 
> > Paul can correct me, but I understand we do not have a list of allowed
> > operations that are exempted from the READ_ONCE() requirement. ie it
> > is not just conditional branching that requires READ_ONCE().
> > 
> > This is why READ_ONCE() must always be on the memory load, because the
> > point is to sanitize away the uncertainty that comes with an unlocked
> > read of unstable memory contents. READ_ONCE() samples the value in
> > memory, and removes all tearing, multiload, etc "instability" that may
> > effect down stream computations. In this way down stream compulations
> > become reliable.
> > 
> > Jason
> 
> So then:

Works for me!

Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>

							Thanx, Paul

> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 0e42038382c1..b404f87e2682 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -482,7 +482,12 @@ unsigned long __get_pfnblock_flags_mask(const struct page *page,
>         word_bitidx = bitidx / BITS_PER_LONG;
>         bitidx &= (BITS_PER_LONG-1);
> 
> -       word = bitmap[word_bitidx];
> +       /*
> +        * This races, without locks, with set_pageblock_migratetype(). Ensure
> +        * a consistent (non-tearing) read of the memory array, so that results,
> +        * even though racy, are not corrupted.
> +        */
> +       word = READ_ONCE(bitmap[word_bitidx]);
>         return (word >> bitidx) & mask;
>  }
> 
> 
> thanks,
> -- 
> John Hubbard
> NVIDIA

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-17 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-10 21:17 [PATCH v4] mm: fix is_pinnable_page against on cma page Minchan Kim
2022-05-10 22:56 ` John Hubbard
2022-05-10 23:31   ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-10 23:58     ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11  0:09       ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11  4:32         ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11 21:46           ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11 22:25             ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11 22:37               ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11 22:49                 ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11 23:08                   ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11 23:13                     ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11 23:15                       ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11 23:28                         ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-11 23:33                           ` John Hubbard
2022-05-11 23:45                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-11 23:57                         ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  0:12                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-12  0:12                           ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  0:22                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-12  0:26                               ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-12  0:34                                 ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  0:49                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-12  1:02                                     ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  1:03                                     ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-12  1:08                                       ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  2:18                                         ` John Hubbard
2022-05-12  3:44                                           ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-12  4:47                                             ` John Hubbard
2022-05-17 14:00                                             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-05-17 18:12                                               ` John Hubbard
2022-05-17 19:28                                                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-05-17 20:12                                                   ` John Hubbard
2022-05-17 20:21                                                     ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2022-05-23 16:33                                                     ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-24  2:55                                                       ` John Hubbard
2022-05-24  5:16                                                         ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-24  6:22                                                           ` John Hubbard
2022-05-24 14:19                                                           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-05-24 15:43                                                             ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-24 15:48                                                               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-05-24 16:37                                                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-24 16:59                                                                   ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-12  3:57                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-05-12  1:03                                   ` Minchan Kim
2022-05-12  0:35                                 ` 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=20220517202115.GE1790663@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1 \
    --to=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joaodias@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    /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).