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:	Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:42:13 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
	josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
	sbw@....edu, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 8/9] rcu: Simplify _rcu_barrier() processing

From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

This commit drops an unneeded ACCESS_ONCE() and simplifies an "our work
is done" check in _rcu_barrier().  This applies feedback from Linus
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/26/777) that he gave to similar code
in an unrelated patch.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
---
 kernel/rcutree.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index c6a064a..612aff1 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -2817,9 +2817,20 @@ static void _rcu_barrier(struct rcu_state *rsp)
 	 * transition.  The "if" expression below therefore rounds the old
 	 * value up to the next even number and adds two before comparing.
 	 */
-	snap_done = ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->n_barrier_done);
+	snap_done = rsp->n_barrier_done;
 	_rcu_barrier_trace(rsp, "Check", -1, snap_done);
-	if (ULONG_CMP_GE(snap_done, ((snap + 1) & ~0x1) + 2)) {
+
+	/*
+	 * If the value in snap is odd, we needed to wait for the current
+	 * rcu_barrier() to complete, then wait for the next one, in other
+	 * words, we need the value of snap_done to be three larger than
+	 * the value of snap.  On the other hand, if the value in snap is
+	 * even, we only had to wait for the next rcu_barrier() to complete,
+	 * in other words, we need the value of snap_done to be only two
+	 * greater than the value of snap.  The "(snap + 3) & 0x1" computes
+	 * this for us (thank you, Linus!).
+	 */
+	if (ULONG_CMP_GE(snap_done, (snap + 3) & ~0x1)) {
 		_rcu_barrier_trace(rsp, "EarlyExit", -1, snap_done);
 		smp_mb(); /* caller's subsequent code after above check. */
 		mutex_unlock(&rsp->barrier_mutex);
-- 
1.8.1.5

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists