linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/12] rcu: Define rcu_assign_pointer() in terms of smp_store

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, 17 Feb 2014 13:35:53 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	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,
	oleg@...hat.com, sbw@....edu,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/12] rcu: Define rcu_assign_pointer() in terms of smp_store_release()

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

The new smp_store_release() function provides better guarantees than did
rcu_assign_pointer(), and potentially less overhead on some architectures.
The guarantee that smp_store_release() provides that rcu_assign_pointer()
does that is obscure, but its lack could cause considerable confusion.
This guarantee is illustrated by the following code fragment:

	struct foo {
		int a;
		int b;
		int c;
		struct foo *next;
	};
	struct foo foo1;
	struct foo foo2;
	struct foo __rcu *foop;

	...

	foo2.a = 1;
	foo2.b = 2;
	BUG_ON(foo2.c);
	rcu_assign_pointer(foop, &foo);

	...

	fp = rcu_dereference(foop);
	fp.c = 3;

The current rcu_assign_pointer() semantics permit the BUG_ON() to
trigger because rcu_assign_pointer()'s smp_wmb() is not guaranteed to
order prior reads against later writes.  This commit therefore upgrades
rcu_assign_pointer() from smp_wmb() to smp_store_release() to avoid this
counter-intuitive outcome.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 include/linux/rcupdate.h | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 278a9da69ec4..32decf1a9c6c 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
 #include <linux/debugobjects.h>
 #include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/compiler.h>
+#include <asm/barrier.h>
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST
 extern int rcutorture_runnable; /* for sysctl */
@@ -580,12 +581,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
  * please be careful when making changes to rcu_assign_pointer() and the
  * other macros that it invokes.
  */
-#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) \
-	do { \
-		smp_wmb(); \
-		ACCESS_ONCE(p) = RCU_INITIALIZER(v); \
-	} while (0)
-
+#define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v) smp_store_release(&p, RCU_INITIALIZER(v))
 
 /**
  * rcu_access_pointer() - fetch RCU pointer with no dereferencing
-- 
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/