linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 19/19] mm: filemap: Avoid unnecessary barries and waitqueue lookups in unlock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 13 May 2014 16:17:48 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux-FSDevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/19] mm: filemap: Avoid unnecessary barries and
 waitqueue lookups in unlock_page fastpath

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 01:53:13PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:45:50AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >  void unlock_page(struct page *page)
> >  {
> > +	wait_queue_head_t *wqh = clear_page_waiters(page);
> > +
> >  	VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(page), page);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * No additional barrier needed due to clear_bit_unlock barriering all updates
> > +	 * before waking waiters
> > +	 */
> >  	clear_bit_unlock(PG_locked, &page->flags);
> > -	smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
> > -	wake_up_page(page, PG_locked);
> 
> This is wrong. The smp_mb__after_clear_bit() is still required to ensure
> that the cleared bit is visible before the wakeup on all architectures.

wakeup implies a mb, and I just noticed that our Documentation is
'obsolete' and only mentions it implies a wmb.

Also, if you're going to use smp_mb__after_atomic() you can use
clear_bit() and not use clear_bit_unlock().



---
Subject: doc: Update wakeup barrier documentation

As per commit e0acd0a68ec7 ("sched: fix the theoretical signal_wake_up()
vs schedule() race") both wakeup and schedule now imply a full barrier.

Furthermore, the barrier is unconditional when calling try_to_wake_up()
and has been for a fair while.

Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
---
 Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index 46412bded104..dae5158c2382 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1881,9 +1881,9 @@ The whole sequence above is available in various canned forms, all of which
 	event_indicated = 1;
 	wake_up_process(event_daemon);
 
-A write memory barrier is implied by wake_up() and co. if and only if they wake
-something up.  The barrier occurs before the task state is cleared, and so sits
-between the STORE to indicate the event and the STORE to set TASK_RUNNING:
+A full memory barrier is implied by wake_up() and co. The barrier occurs
+before the task state is cleared, and so sits between the STORE to indicate
+the event and the STORE to set TASK_RUNNING:
 
 	CPU 1				CPU 2
 	===============================	===============================
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/