linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@fb.com, mingo@kernel.org, parri.andrea@gmail.com,
	will@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk,
	luc.maranget@inria.fr, akiyks@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH memory-model 2/4] tools/memory-model: Add example for heuristic lockless reads
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 15:57:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aaef6bbb-0711-7900-7cbc-cb3bb19bd25c@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210723130554.GA38923@rowland.harvard.edu>

Hi Alan,

On 7/23/21 3:05 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 08:52:50AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>> Hi Alan,
> Hi.
>
>> On 7/23/21 4:08 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 02:10:01PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>> This commit adds example code for heuristic lockless reads, based loosely
>>>> on the sem_lock() and sem_unlock() functions.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
>>>> [ paulmck: Update per Manfred Spraul and Hillf Danton feedback. ]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>    .../Documentation/access-marking.txt          | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    1 file changed, 94 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
>>>> index 58bff26198767..be7d507997cf8 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
>>>> +++ b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
>>>> @@ -319,6 +319,100 @@ of the ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER() is to allow KCSAN to check for a buggy
>>>>    concurrent lockless write.
>>>> +Lock-Protected Writes With Heuristic Lockless Reads
>>>> +---------------------------------------------------
>>>> +
>>>> +For another example, suppose that the code can normally make use of
>>>> +a per-data-structure lock, but there are times when a global lock
>>>> +is required.  These times are indicated via a global flag.  The code
>>>> +might look as follows, and is based loosely on nf_conntrack_lock(),
>>>> +nf_conntrack_all_lock(), and nf_conntrack_all_unlock():
>>>> +
>>>> +	bool global_flag;
>>>> +	DEFINE_SPINLOCK(global_lock);
>>>> +	struct foo {
>>>> +		spinlock_t f_lock;
>>>> +		int f_data;
>>>> +	};
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* All foo structures are in the following array. */
>>>> +	int nfoo;
>>>> +	struct foo *foo_array;
>>>> +
>>>> +	void do_something_locked(struct foo *fp)
>>>> +	{
>>>> +		bool gf = true;
>>>> +
>>>> +		/* IMPORTANT: Heuristic plus spin_lock()! */
>>>> +		if (!data_race(global_flag)) {
>>>> +			spin_lock(&fp->f_lock);
>>>> +			if (!smp_load_acquire(&global_flag)) {
>>>> +				do_something(fp);
>>>> +				spin_unlock(&fp->f_lock);
>>>> +				return;
>>>> +			}
>>>> +			spin_unlock(&fp->f_lock);
>>>> +		}
>>>> +		spin_lock(&global_lock);
>>>> +		/* Lock held, thus global flag cannot change. */
>>>> +		if (!global_flag) {
>>> How can global_flag ever be true at this point?  The only line of code
>>> that sets it is in begin_global() below, it only runs while global_lock
>>> is held, and global_flag is set back to false before the lock is
>>> released.
>> It can't be true. The code is a simplified version of the algorithm in
>> ipc/sem.c.
>>
>> For the ipc/sem.c, global_flag can remain true even after dropping
>> global_lock.
>>
>> When transferring the approach to nf_conntrack_core, I didn't notice that
>> nf_conntrack doesn't need a persistent global_flag.
>>
>> Thus the recheck after spin_lock(&global_lock) is not needed.
> In fact, since global_flag is true if and only if global_lock is locked,
> perhaps it can be removed entirely and replaced with
> spin_is_locked(&global_lock).

I try to avoid spin_is_locked():

- spin_is_locked() is no memory barrier

- spin_lock() is an acquire memory barrier - for the read part. There is 
no barrier at all related to the write part.

With an explicit variable, the memory barriers can be controlled much 
better - and it is guaranteed to work in the same way on all architectures.


--

     Manfred


  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-23 13:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-21 21:07 [PATCH kcsan 0/8] KCSAN updates for v5.15 Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 1/8] kcsan: Improve some Kconfig comments Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 2/8] kcsan: Remove CONFIG_KCSAN_DEBUG Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 3/8] kcsan: Introduce CONFIG_KCSAN_STRICT Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 4/8] kcsan: Reduce get_ctx() uses in kcsan_found_watchpoint() Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 5/8] kcsan: Rework atomic.h into permissive.h Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 6/8] kcsan: Print if strict or non-strict during init Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 7/8] kcsan: permissive: Ignore data-racy 1-bit value changes Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:08 ` [PATCH kcsan 8/8] kcsan: Make strict mode imply interruptible watchers Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:10 ` [PATCH memory-model 1/4] tools/memory-model: Make read_foo_diagnostic() more clearly diagnostic Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:10 ` [PATCH memory-model 2/4] tools/memory-model: Add example for heuristic lockless reads Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23  2:08   ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23  6:52     ` Manfred Spraul
2021-07-23 13:05       ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23 13:57         ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2021-07-23 16:30         ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23 17:08           ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23 20:32             ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23 21:03               ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23 22:29                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23 16:24     ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23 16:59       ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23 17:30         ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-23 18:11           ` Alan Stern
2021-07-23 20:28             ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-28 17:40   ` [PATCH v2 " Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:10 ` [PATCH memory-model 3/4] tools/memory-model: Heuristics using data_race() must handle all values Paul E. McKenney
2021-07-21 21:10 ` [PATCH memory-model 4/4] tools/memory-model: Document data_race(READ_ONCE()) 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=aaef6bbb-0711-7900-7cbc-cb3bb19bd25c@colorfullife.com \
    --to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
    --cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=will@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).