linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/17] rcu: Eliminate read-modify-write ACCESS

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, 8 Jul 2014 12:59:46 -0400
From:	Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...nel.org,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, niv@...ibm.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 06/17] rcu: Eliminate read-modify-write
 ACCESS_ONCE() calls

Hi Paul,

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> RCU contains code of the following forms:
>
>         ACCESS_ONCE(x)++;
>         ACCESS_ONCE(x) += y;
>         ACCESS_ONCE(x) -= y;
>
> Now these constructs do operate correctly, but they really result in a
> pair of volatile accesses, one to do the load and another to do the store.
> This can be confusing, as the casual reader might well assume that (for
> example) gcc might generate a memory-to-memory add instruction for each
> of these three cases.  In fact, gcc will do no such thing.  Also, there
> is a good chance that the kernel will move to separate load and store
> variants of ACCESS_ONCE(), and constructs like the above could easily
> confuse both people and scripts attempting to make that sort of change.
> Finally, most of RCU's read-modify-write uses of ACCESS_ONCE() really
> only need the store to be volatile, so that the read-modify-write form
> might be misleading.
>
> This commit therefore changes the above forms in RCU so that each instance
> of ACCESS_ONCE() either does a load or a store, but not both.  In a few
> cases, ACCESS_ONCE() was not critical, for example, for maintaining
> statisitics.  In these cases, ACCESS_ONCE() has been dispensed with
> entirely.
>

Is there any reason why |=, &= cannot be replaced similarly? Also
there are a few more in tree_plugin.h. Please find patch below:

Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
---
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index dac6d20..f500395 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -1700,7 +1700,7 @@ static int rcu_gp_fqs(struct rcu_state *rsp, int
fqs_state_in)
        if (ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) & RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS) {
                raw_spin_lock_irq(&rnp->lock);
                smp_mb__after_unlock_lock();
-               ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) &= ~RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS;
+               ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) = rsp->gp_flags & ~RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS;
                raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rnp->lock);
        }
        return fqs_state;
@@ -2514,7 +2514,7 @@ static void force_quiescent_state(struct rcu_state *rsp)
                raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp_old->lock, flags);
                return;  /* Someone beat us to it. */
        }
-       ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) |= RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS;
+       ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->gp_flags) = rsp->gp_flags | RCU_GP_FLAG_FQS;
        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rnp_old->lock, flags);
        wake_up(&rsp->gp_wq);  /* Memory barrier implied by wake_up() path. */
 }
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index 1a4ab26..752d382 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -897,7 +897,8 @@ void synchronize_rcu_expedited(void)

        /* Clean up and exit. */
        smp_mb(); /* ensure expedited GP seen before counter increment. */
-       ACCESS_ONCE(sync_rcu_preempt_exp_count)++;
+       ACCESS_ONCE(sync_rcu_preempt_exp_count) =
+                                       sync_rcu_preempt_exp_count + 1;
 unlock_mb_ret:
        mutex_unlock(&sync_rcu_preempt_exp_mutex);
 mb_ret:
@@ -2307,8 +2308,9 @@ static int rcu_nocb_kthread(void *arg)
                        list = next;
                }
                trace_rcu_batch_end(rdp->rsp->name, c, !!list, 0, 0, 1);
-               ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->nocb_p_count) -= c;
-               ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->nocb_p_count_lazy) -= cl;
+               ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->nocb_p_count) = rdp->nocb_p_count - c;
+               ACCESS_ONCE(rdp->nocb_p_count_lazy) =
+                                               rdp->nocb_p_count_lazy - cl;
                rdp->n_nocbs_invoked += c;
        }
        return 0;

-- 
Pranith
--
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/