QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.ibm.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio-ccw: fix virtio_set_ind_atomic
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 08:45:14 +0200
Message-ID: <8b0e5564-fd2b-a54c-1b32-6d9ea5de7d3c@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200616083333.2d4edfac.cohuck@redhat.com>



On 16.06.20 08:33, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 07:58:53 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 16.06.20 06:50, Halil Pasic wrote:
>>> The atomic_cmpxchg() loop is broken because we occasionally end up with
>>> old and _old having different values (a legit compiler can generate code
>>> that accessed *ind_addr again to pick up a value for _old instead of
>>> using the value of old that was already fetched according to the
>>> rules of the abstract machine). This means the underlying CS instruction
>>> may use a different old (_old) than the one we intended to use if
>>> atomic_cmpxchg() performed the xchg part.
>>>
>>> Let us use volatile to force the rules of the abstract machine for
>>> accesses to *ind_addr. Let us also rewrite the loop so, we that the
>>> new old is used to compute the new desired value if the xchg part
>>> is not performed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>>> Reported-by: Andre Wild <Andre.Wild1@ibm.com>
>>> Fixes: 7e7494627f ("s390x/virtio-ccw: Adapter interrupt support.")
>>> ---
>>>  hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
>>> index c1f4bb1d33..3c988a000b 100644
>>> --- a/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
>>> +++ b/hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c
>>> @@ -786,9 +786,10 @@ static inline VirtioCcwDevice *to_virtio_ccw_dev_fast(DeviceState *d)
>>>  static uint8_t virtio_set_ind_atomic(SubchDev *sch, uint64_t ind_loc,
>>>                                       uint8_t to_be_set)
>>>  {
>>> -    uint8_t ind_old, ind_new;
>>> +    uint8_t expected, actual;
>>>      hwaddr len = 1;
>>> -    uint8_t *ind_addr;
>>> +    /* avoid  multiple fetches */
>>> +    uint8_t volatile *ind_addr;
>>>  
>>>      ind_addr = cpu_physical_memory_map(ind_loc, &len, true);
>>>      if (!ind_addr) {
>>> @@ -796,14 +797,15 @@ static uint8_t virtio_set_ind_atomic(SubchDev *sch, uint64_t ind_loc,
>>>                       __func__, sch->cssid, sch->ssid, sch->schid);
>>>          return -1;
>>>      }
>>> +    actual = *ind_addr;
>>>      do {
>>> -        ind_old = *ind_addr;  
>>
>> to make things easier to understand. Adding a barrier in here also fixes the issue.
>> Reasoning follows below:
>>
>>> -        ind_new = ind_old | to_be_set;  
>>
>> with an analysis from Andreas (cc)
>>
>>  #define atomic_cmpxchg__nocheck(ptr, old, new)    ({                    \   
>>  
>>      typeof_strip_qual(*ptr) _old = (old);                               \   
>>  
>>      (void)__atomic_compare_exchange_n(ptr, &_old, new, false,           \   
>>  
>>                                __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);      \   
>>  
>>      _old;                                                               \   
>>  
>>  })
>>  
>> ind_old is copied into _old in the macro. Instead of doing the copy from the
>> register the compiler reloads the value from memory. The result is that _old
>> and ind_old end up having different values. _old in r1 with the bits set
>> already and ind_old in r10 with the bits cleared. _old gets updated by CS
>> and matches ind_old afterwards - both with the bits being 0. So the !=
>> compare is false and the loop is left without having set any bits.
>>
>>
>> Paolo (to),
>> I am asking myself if it would be safer to add a barrier or something like
>> this in the macros in include/qemu/atomic.h. 

Having said this, I think that the refactoring from Halil (to re-use actual) 
also makes sense independent of the fix. 
> 
> I'm also wondering whether this has been seen on other architectures as
> well? There are also some callers in non-s390x code, and dealing with
> this in common code would catch them as well.
> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -    } while (atomic_cmpxchg(ind_addr, ind_old, ind_new) != ind_old);
>>> -    trace_virtio_ccw_set_ind(ind_loc, ind_old, ind_new);
>>> -    cpu_physical_memory_unmap(ind_addr, len, 1, len);
>>> +        expected = actual;
>>> +        actual = atomic_cmpxchg(ind_addr, expected, expected | to_be_set);
>>> +    } while (actual != expected);
>>> +    trace_virtio_ccw_set_ind(ind_loc, actual, actual | to_be_set);
>>> +    cpu_physical_memory_unmap((void *)ind_addr, len, 1, len);
>>>  
>>> -    return ind_old;
>>> +    return actual;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  static void virtio_ccw_notify(DeviceState *d, uint16_t vector)
>>>   
>>
>>
> 


  reply index

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-16  4:50 [PATCH 0/2] two atomic_cmpxchg() related fixes Halil Pasic
2020-06-16  4:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] virtio-ccw: fix virtio_set_ind_atomic Halil Pasic
2020-06-16  5:58   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-16  6:33     ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-16  6:45       ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2020-06-19  7:14         ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-17 23:56       ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-19  7:33         ` David Hildenbrand
2020-06-19  8:17           ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-16  9:31     ` Halil Pasic
2020-07-01 13:13   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-04 18:34   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-07-06  5:44     ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-06 11:19     ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-16  4:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] s390x/pci: fix set_ind_atomic Halil Pasic
2020-07-01 13:14   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 12:01 ` [PATCH 0/2] two atomic_cmpxchg() related fixes Cornelia Huck
2020-07-01 12:06   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 13:10     ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-03 13:37     ` Halil Pasic
2020-07-03 14:03       ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-02 11:18 ` Cornelia Huck

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=8b0e5564-fd2b-a54c-1b32-6d9ea5de7d3c@de.ibm.com \
    --to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=krebbel@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.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

QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/0 qemu-devel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/1 qemu-devel/git/1.git

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

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.nongnu.qemu-devel


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