linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lglock: add read-preference local-global rwlock

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]

Message-ID: <CANN689HEW=b5S93J27p+rBX-5m7jkW4FER=eHDCp7OgMaTWLPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 2 Mar 2013 20:13:17 +0800
From:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <eag0628@...il.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
	mingo@...nel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux@....linux.org.uk, xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, rostedt@...dmis.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	sbw@....edu, tj@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lglock: add read-preference local-global rwlock

On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> Lai, I didn't read this discussion except the code posted by Michel.
> I'll try to read this patch carefully later, but I'd like to ask
> a couple of questions.
>
> This version looks more complex than Michel's, why? Just curious, I
> am trying to understand what I missed. See
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136196350213593

>From what I can see, my version used local_refcnt to count how many
reentrant locks are represented by the fastpath lglock spinlock; Lai's
version uses it to count how many reentrant locks are represented by
either the fastpath lglock spinlock or the global rwlock, with
FALLBACK_BASE being a bit thrown in so we can remember which of these
locks was acquired. My version would be slower if it needs to take the
slow path in a reentrant way, but I'm not sure it matters either :)

> Interrupt handler on CPU_1 does _read_lock() notices ->reader_refcnt != 0
> and simply does this_cpu_inc(), so reader_refcnt == FALLBACK_BASE + 1.
>
> Then irq does _read_unlock(), and
>
>> +void lg_rwlock_local_read_unlock(struct lgrwlock *lgrw)
>> +{
>> +     switch (__this_cpu_dec_return(*lgrw->reader_refcnt)) {
>> +     case 0:
>> +             lg_local_unlock(&lgrw->lglock);
>> +             return;
>> +     case FALLBACK_BASE:
>> +             __this_cpu_sub(*lgrw->reader_refcnt, FALLBACK_BASE);
>> +             read_unlock(&lgrw->fallback_rwlock);
>
> hits this case?
>
> Doesn't look right, but most probably I missed something.

Good catch. I think this is easily fixed by setting reader_refcn
directly to FALLBACK_BASE+1, instead of setting it to FALLBACK_BASE
and then incrementing it to FALLBACK_BASE+1.

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
--
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/