linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] percpu: add data dependency barrier in percpu accessors and operations

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1407141014390.25436@gentwo.org>
Date:	Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:22:08 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] percpu: add data dependency barrier in percpu
 accessors and operations

On Mon, 14 Jul 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> Here is the sort of thing that I would be concerned about:
>
> 	p = alloc_percpu(struct foo);
> 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> 		initialize(per_cpu_ptr(p, cpu);
> 	gp = p;
>
> We clearly need a memory barrier in there somewhere, and it cannot
> be buried in alloc_percpu().  Some cases avoid trouble due to locking,
> for example, initialize() might acquire a per-CPU lock and later uses
> might acquire that same lock.  Clearly, use of a global lock would not
> be helpful from a scalability viewpoint.

The knowledge about the offset p is not available before gp is assigned
to.

gp usually is part of a struct that contains some form of serialization.
F.e. in the slab allocators there is a kmem_cache structure that contains
gp.

After alloc_percpu() and other preparatory work the structure is inserted
into a linked list while holding the global semaphore (slab_mutex). After
release of the semaphore the kmem_cache address is passed to the
subsystem. Then other processors can potentially use that new kmem_cache
structure to access new percpu data related to the new cache.

There is no scalability issue for the initialization since there cannot
be a concurrent access since the offset of the percpu value is not known
by other processors at that point.

--
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/