linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/5] nohz: Use IPI implicit full barrier against rq->nr

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:	Sun, 25 May 2014 16:29:51 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] nohz: Use IPI implicit full barrier against rq->nr_running r/w

A full dynticks CPU is allowed to stop its tick when a single task runs.
Meanwhile when a new task gets enqueued, the CPU must be notified so that
it can restart its tick to maintain local fairness and other accounting
details.

This notification is performed by way of an IPI. Then when the target
receives the IPI, we expect it to see the new value of rq->nr_running.

Hence the following ordering scenario:

   CPU 0                   CPU 1

   write rq->running       get IPI
   smp_wmb()               smp_rmb()
   send IPI                read rq->nr_running

But Paul Mckenney says that nowadays IPIs imply a full barrier on
all architectures. So we can safely remove this pair and rely on the
implicit barriers that come along IPI send/receive. Lets
just comment on this new assumption.

Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c  |  9 +++++----
 kernel/sched/sched.h | 10 ++++++++--
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index fb6dfad..a06cac1 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -670,10 +670,11 @@ bool sched_can_stop_tick(void)
 
        rq = this_rq();
 
-       /* Make sure rq->nr_running update is visible after the IPI */
-       smp_rmb();
-
-       /* More than one running task need preemption */
+       /*
+	* More than one running task need preemption.
+	* nr_running update is assumed to be visible
+	* after IPI is sent from wakers.
+	*/
        if (rq->nr_running > 1)
                return false;
 
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 6089e00..219bfbd 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1223,8 +1223,14 @@ static inline void inc_nr_running(struct rq *rq)
 #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
 	if (rq->nr_running == 2) {
 		if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(rq->cpu)) {
-			/* Order rq->nr_running write against the IPI */
-			smp_wmb();
+			/*
+			 * Tick is needed if more than one task runs on a CPU.
+			 * Send the target an IPI to kick it out of nohz mode.
+			 *
+			 * We assume that IPI implies full memory barrier and the
+			 * new value of rq->nr_running is visible on reception
+			 * from the target.
+			 */
 			tick_nohz_full_kick_cpu(rq->cpu);
 		}
        }
-- 
1.8.3.1

--
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/