linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] locking/rwsem: Document barrier need when waking tasks

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: <1422390627.4604.5.camel@stgolabs.net>
Date:	Tue, 27 Jan 2015 12:30:27 -0800
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] locking/rwsem: Document barrier need when waking
 tasks

On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:07 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:36:05PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > The need for the smp_mb in __rwsem_do_wake should be
> > properly documented. Applies to both xadd and spinlock
> > variants.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
> > ---
> >  kernel/locking/rwsem-spinlock.c | 5 +++++
> >  kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c     | 5 +++++
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-spinlock.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-spinlock.c
> > index 2555ae1..54f7a17 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-spinlock.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-spinlock.c
> > @@ -85,6 +85,11 @@ __rwsem_do_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int wakewrite)
> >  
> >  		list_del(&waiter->list);
> >  		tsk = waiter->task;
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Ensure that all cores see the read before
> > +		 * setting it to the waiter task to nil, as that
> > +		 * grants the read lock to the next task.
> > +		 */
> >  		smp_mb();
> >  		waiter->task = NULL;
> >  		wake_up_process(tsk);
> 
> Could you enhance that comment by pointing at the pairing code? Is that
> the wait loop in rwsem_down_read_failed()?

Yep.

> Also, the comment confuses, how can all cores observe a read into a
> local variable?

Yep, I'll rephrase that ;)

--
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/