diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/locking/qspinlock.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 88 |
1 files changed, 78 insertions, 10 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c index 5fc8c311b..b2caec731 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU_ALIGNED(struct mcs_spinlock, mcs_nodes[MAX_NODES]); * therefore increment the cpu number by one. */ -static inline u32 encode_tail(int cpu, int idx) +static inline __pure u32 encode_tail(int cpu, int idx) { u32 tail; @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static inline u32 encode_tail(int cpu, int idx) return tail; } -static inline struct mcs_spinlock *decode_tail(u32 tail) +static inline __pure struct mcs_spinlock *decode_tail(u32 tail) { int cpu = (tail >> _Q_TAIL_CPU_OFFSET) - 1; int idx = (tail & _Q_TAIL_IDX_MASK) >> _Q_TAIL_IDX_OFFSET; @@ -268,6 +268,63 @@ static __always_inline u32 __pv_wait_head_or_lock(struct qspinlock *lock, #endif /* + * Various notes on spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait(), which are + * 'interesting' functions: + * + * PROBLEM: some architectures have an interesting issue with atomic ACQUIRE + * operations in that the ACQUIRE applies to the LOAD _not_ the STORE (ARM64, + * PPC). Also qspinlock has a similar issue per construction, the setting of + * the locked byte can be unordered acquiring the lock proper. + * + * This gets to be 'interesting' in the following cases, where the /should/s + * end up false because of this issue. + * + * + * CASE 1: + * + * So the spin_is_locked() correctness issue comes from something like: + * + * CPU0 CPU1 + * + * global_lock(); local_lock(i) + * spin_lock(&G) spin_lock(&L[i]) + * for (i) if (!spin_is_locked(&G)) { + * spin_unlock_wait(&L[i]); smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); + * return; + * } + * // deal with fail + * + * Where it is important CPU1 sees G locked or CPU0 sees L[i] locked such + * that there is exclusion between the two critical sections. + * + * The load from spin_is_locked(&G) /should/ be constrained by the ACQUIRE from + * spin_lock(&L[i]), and similarly the load(s) from spin_unlock_wait(&L[i]) + * /should/ be constrained by the ACQUIRE from spin_lock(&G). + * + * Similarly, later stuff is constrained by the ACQUIRE from CTRL+RMB. + * + * + * CASE 2: + * + * For spin_unlock_wait() there is a second correctness issue, namely: + * + * CPU0 CPU1 + * + * flag = set; + * smp_mb(); spin_lock(&l) + * spin_unlock_wait(&l); if (!flag) + * // add to lockless list + * spin_unlock(&l); + * // iterate lockless list + * + * Which wants to ensure that CPU1 will stop adding bits to the list and CPU0 + * will observe the last entry on the list (if spin_unlock_wait() had ACQUIRE + * semantics etc..) + * + * Where flag /should/ be ordered against the locked store of l. + */ + +/* * queued_spin_lock_slowpath() can (load-)ACQUIRE the lock before * issuing an _unordered_ store to set _Q_LOCKED_VAL. * @@ -322,7 +379,7 @@ void queued_spin_unlock_wait(struct qspinlock *lock) cpu_relax(); done: - smp_rmb(); /* CTRL + RMB -> ACQUIRE */ + smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(queued_spin_unlock_wait); #endif @@ -418,7 +475,7 @@ void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val) * sequentiality; this is because not all clear_pending_set_locked() * implementations imply full barriers. */ - smp_cond_acquire(!(atomic_read(&lock->val) & _Q_LOCKED_MASK)); + smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter, !(VAL & _Q_LOCKED_MASK)); /* * take ownership and clear the pending bit. @@ -455,6 +512,8 @@ queue: * pending stuff. * * p,*,* -> n,*,* + * + * RELEASE, such that the stores to @node must be complete. */ old = xchg_tail(lock, tail); next = NULL; @@ -465,6 +524,15 @@ queue: */ if (old & _Q_TAIL_MASK) { prev = decode_tail(old); + /* + * The above xchg_tail() is also a load of @lock which generates, + * through decode_tail(), a pointer. + * + * The address dependency matches the RELEASE of xchg_tail() + * such that the access to @prev must happen after. + */ + smp_read_barrier_depends(); + WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, node); pv_wait_node(node, prev); @@ -494,7 +562,7 @@ queue: * * The PV pv_wait_head_or_lock function, if active, will acquire * the lock and return a non-zero value. So we have to skip the - * smp_cond_acquire() call. As the next PV queue head hasn't been + * smp_cond_load_acquire() call. As the next PV queue head hasn't been * designated yet, there is no way for the locked value to become * _Q_SLOW_VAL. So both the set_locked() and the * atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed() calls will be safe. @@ -505,7 +573,7 @@ queue: if ((val = pv_wait_head_or_lock(lock, node))) goto locked; - smp_cond_acquire(!((val = atomic_read(&lock->val)) & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)); + val = smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter, !(VAL & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)); locked: /* @@ -525,9 +593,9 @@ locked: break; } /* - * The smp_cond_acquire() call above has provided the necessary - * acquire semantics required for locking. At most two - * iterations of this loop may be ran. + * The smp_cond_load_acquire() call above has provided the + * necessary acquire semantics required for locking. At most + * two iterations of this loop may be ran. */ old = atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(&lock->val, val, _Q_LOCKED_VAL); if (old == val) @@ -551,7 +619,7 @@ release: /* * release the node */ - this_cpu_dec(mcs_nodes[0].count); + __this_cpu_dec(mcs_nodes[0].count); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(queued_spin_lock_slowpath); |