linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH] documentation: memory-barriers: fix smp_mb__before

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: <20150401152605.GP9023@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:26:05 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] documentation: memory-barriers: fix
 smp_mb__before_spinlock() semantics

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 09:39:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Our current documentation claims that, when followed by an ACQUIRE,
> smp_mb__before_spinlock() orders prior loads against subsequent loads
> and stores, which isn't actually true.
> 
> Fix the documentation to state that this sequence orders only prior
> stores against subsequent loads and stores.
> 
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> ---
> 
> Could somebody pick this up please? I guess I could route it via the arm64
> tree with an Ack, but I'd rather it went through Paul or -tip.

Queued for 4.2, along with a separate patch for PowerPC that make it so
that PowerPC actually behaves as described below.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

>  Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> index ca2387ef27ab..fa28a0c1e2b1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> @@ -1768,10 +1768,9 @@ for each construct.  These operations all imply certain barriers:
> 
>       Memory operations issued before the ACQUIRE may be completed after
>       the ACQUIRE operation has completed.  An smp_mb__before_spinlock(),
> -     combined with a following ACQUIRE, orders prior loads against
> -     subsequent loads and stores and also orders prior stores against
> -     subsequent stores.  Note that this is weaker than smp_mb()!  The
> -     smp_mb__before_spinlock() primitive is free on many architectures.
> +     combined with a following ACQUIRE, orders prior stores against
> +     subsequent loads and stores. Note that this is weaker than smp_mb()!
> +     The smp_mb__before_spinlock() primitive is free on many architectures.
> 
>   (2) RELEASE operation implication:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

    powerpc: Fix smp_mb__before_spinlock()
    
    Currently, smp_mb__before_spinlock() is defined to be smp_wmb()
    in core code, but this is not sufficient on PowerPC.  This patch
    therefore supplies an override for the generic definition to
    strengthen smp_mb__before_spinlock() to smp_mb(), as is needed
    on PowerPC.
    
    Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
    Cc: <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
index a3bf5be111ff..1124f59b8df4 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -89,5 +89,6 @@ do {									\
 
 #define smp_mb__before_atomic()     smp_mb()
 #define smp_mb__after_atomic()      smp_mb()
+#define smp_mb__before_spinlock()   smp_mb()
 
 #endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_BARRIER_H */

--
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/