linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] barriers: introduce smp_mb__release

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, 22 Sep 2015 07:42:19 +0800
From:	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] barriers: introduce smp_mb__release_acquire and update
 documentation

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:23:01PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:10:38PM +0100, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 09:45:15PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 07:00:01PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 03:50:12AM +0100, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > > > If an ACQUIRE loads the value of stored by a RELEASE, then after the
> > > > > ACQUIRE operation, the CPU executing the ACQUIRE operation will perceive
> > > > > all the memory operations that have been perceived by the CPU executing
> > > > > the RELEASE operation before the RELEASE operation. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Which means a release+acquire pair to the same variable guarantees
> > > > > transitivity.
> > > > 
> > > > Almost, but on arm64 at least, "all the memory operations" above doesn't
> > > > include reads by other CPUs. I'm struggling to figure out whether that's
> > > > actually an issue.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Ah.. that's indeed an issue! for example:
> > > 
> > > CPU 0			CPU 1				CPU 2
> > > =====================	==========================	================
> > > {a = 0, b = 0, c = 0}
> > > r1 = READ_ONCE(a);	WRITE_ONCE(b, 1);		r3 = smp_load_acquire(&c);
> > > smp_rmb();		smp_store_release(&c, 1);	WRITE_ONCE(a, 1);
> > > r2 = READ_ONCE(b)
> > > 
> > > where r1 == 1 && r2 == 0 && r3 == 1 is actually not prohibitted, at
> > > least on POWER.
> > > 
> > 
> > Oops.. I use wrong litmus here.. so this is prohibitted on POWER. Sorry
> > for the misleading. How about the behavior of that on arm and arm64?
> 
> That explicit test is forbidden on arm/arm64 because of the smp_rmb(),
> but if you rewrite it as (LDAR is acquire, STLR is release):
> 
> 
>   {
>   0:X1=x; 0:X3=y;
>   1:X1=y; 1:X2=z;
>   2:X1=z; 2:X3=x;
>   }
>    P0           | P1           | P2                ;
>    LDAR W0,[X1] | MOV W0,#1    | LDAR W0,[X1]      ;
>    LDR W2,[X3]  | STR W0,[X1]  | MOV W2,#1         ;
>                 | STLR W0,[X2] | STR W2,[X3]       ;
> 
>   Observed
>       0:X0=1; 0:X2=0; 2:X0=1;
> 

X0 is W0, etc. Right?

> 
> then it is permitted on arm64. Note that herd currently claims that this
> is forbidden, but I'm talking to the authors about getting that fixed :)
> 

Good to know ;-) I think this actually means two things:

1.	ACQUIRE doesn't provide transitivity itself

and 

2.	We still need the term like "transitively before".

Regards,
Boqun

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)