| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1446204397-16594-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:26:37 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: [PATCH] ipc/msg: Implement lockless pipelined wakeups
This patch moves the wakeup_process() invocation so it is not done under
the perm->lock by making use of a lockless wake_q. With this change, the
waiter is woken up once the message has been assigned and it does not
need to loop on SMP if the message points to NULL. In the signal case we
still need to check the pointer under the lock to verify the state.
This change should also avoid the introduction of preempt_disable() in
-RT which avoids a busy-loop which pools for the NULL -> !NULL
change if the waiter has a higher priority compared to the waker.
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
---
This was just compile tested. It would be nice if somone with real
workload could test it. Otherwise I could hack something myself and check
if it still works.
ipc/msg.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++---------------------------------------------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ipc/msg.c b/ipc/msg.c
index 1471db9a7e61..b8c5e7f2bebc 100644
--- a/ipc/msg.c
+++ b/ipc/msg.c
@@ -183,20 +183,14 @@ static void ss_wakeup(struct list_head *h, int kill)
}
}
-static void expunge_all(struct msg_queue *msq, int res)
+static void expunge_all(struct msg_queue *msq, int res,
+ struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
{
struct msg_receiver *msr, *t;
list_for_each_entry_safe(msr, t, &msq->q_receivers, r_list) {
- msr->r_msg = NULL; /* initialize expunge ordering */
- wake_up_process(msr->r_tsk);
- /*
- * Ensure that the wakeup is visible before setting r_msg as
- * the receiving end depends on it: either spinning on a nil,
- * or dealing with -EAGAIN cases. See lockless receive part 1
- * and 2 in do_msgrcv().
- */
- smp_wmb(); /* barrier (B) */
+
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, msr->r_tsk);
msr->r_msg = ERR_PTR(res);
}
}
@@ -213,11 +207,13 @@ static void freeque(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct kern_ipc_perm *ipcp)
{
struct msg_msg *msg, *t;
struct msg_queue *msq = container_of(ipcp, struct msg_queue, q_perm);
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
- expunge_all(msq, -EIDRM);
+ expunge_all(msq, -EIDRM, &wake_q);
ss_wakeup(&msq->q_senders, 1);
msg_rmid(ns, msq);
ipc_unlock_object(&msq->q_perm);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
rcu_read_unlock();
list_for_each_entry_safe(msg, t, &msq->q_messages, m_list) {
@@ -342,6 +338,7 @@ static int msgctl_down(struct ipc_namespace *ns, int msqid, int cmd,
struct kern_ipc_perm *ipcp;
struct msqid64_ds uninitialized_var(msqid64);
struct msg_queue *msq;
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
int err;
if (cmd == IPC_SET) {
@@ -389,7 +386,7 @@ static int msgctl_down(struct ipc_namespace *ns, int msqid, int cmd,
/* sleeping receivers might be excluded by
* stricter permissions.
*/
- expunge_all(msq, -EAGAIN);
+ expunge_all(msq, -EAGAIN, &wake_q);
/* sleeping senders might be able to send
* due to a larger queue size.
*/
@@ -402,6 +399,7 @@ static int msgctl_down(struct ipc_namespace *ns, int msqid, int cmd,
out_unlock0:
ipc_unlock_object(&msq->q_perm);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
out_unlock1:
rcu_read_unlock();
out_up:
@@ -566,7 +564,8 @@ static int testmsg(struct msg_msg *msg, long type, int mode)
return 0;
}
-static inline int pipelined_send(struct msg_queue *msq, struct msg_msg *msg)
+static inline int pipelined_send(struct msg_queue *msq, struct msg_msg *msg,
+ struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
{
struct msg_receiver *msr, *t;
@@ -577,27 +576,13 @@ static inline int pipelined_send(struct msg_queue *msq, struct msg_msg *msg)
list_del(&msr->r_list);
if (msr->r_maxsize < msg->m_ts) {
- /* initialize pipelined send ordering */
- msr->r_msg = NULL;
- wake_up_process(msr->r_tsk);
- /* barrier (B) see barrier comment below */
- smp_wmb();
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, msr->r_tsk);
msr->r_msg = ERR_PTR(-E2BIG);
} else {
- msr->r_msg = NULL;
msq->q_lrpid = task_pid_vnr(msr->r_tsk);
msq->q_rtime = get_seconds();
- wake_up_process(msr->r_tsk);
- /*
- * Ensure that the wakeup is visible before
- * setting r_msg, as the receiving can otherwise
- * exit - once r_msg is set, the receiver can
- * continue. See lockless receive part 1 and 2
- * in do_msgrcv(). Barrier (B).
- */
- smp_wmb();
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, msr->r_tsk);
msr->r_msg = msg;
-
return 1;
}
}
@@ -613,6 +598,7 @@ long do_msgsnd(int msqid, long mtype, void __user *mtext,
struct msg_msg *msg;
int err;
struct ipc_namespace *ns;
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
ns = current->nsproxy->ipc_ns;
@@ -698,7 +684,7 @@ long do_msgsnd(int msqid, long mtype, void __user *mtext,
msq->q_lspid = task_tgid_vnr(current);
msq->q_stime = get_seconds();
- if (!pipelined_send(msq, msg)) {
+ if (!pipelined_send(msq, msg, &wake_q)) {
/* no one is waiting for this message, enqueue it */
list_add_tail(&msg->m_list, &msq->q_messages);
msq->q_cbytes += msgsz;
@@ -712,6 +698,7 @@ long do_msgsnd(int msqid, long mtype, void __user *mtext,
out_unlock0:
ipc_unlock_object(&msq->q_perm);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
out_unlock1:
rcu_read_unlock();
if (msg != NULL)
@@ -932,57 +919,25 @@ long do_msgrcv(int msqid, void __user *buf, size_t bufsz, long msgtyp, int msgfl
rcu_read_lock();
/* Lockless receive, part 2:
- * Wait until pipelined_send or expunge_all are outside of
- * wake_up_process(). There is a race with exit(), see
- * ipc/mqueue.c for the details. The correct serialization
- * ensures that a receiver cannot continue without the wakeup
- * being visibible _before_ setting r_msg:
+ * The work in pipelined_send() and expunge_all():
+ * - Set pointer to message
+ * - Queue the receiver task for later wakeup
+ * - Wake up the process after the lock is dropped.
*
- * CPU 0 CPU 1
- * <loop receiver>
- * smp_rmb(); (A) <-- pair -. <waker thread>
- * <load ->r_msg> | msr->r_msg = NULL;
- * | wake_up_process();
- * <continue> `------> smp_wmb(); (B)
- * msr->r_msg = msg;
- *
- * Where (A) orders the message value read and where (B) orders
- * the write to the r_msg -- done in both pipelined_send and
- * expunge_all.
+ * Should the process wake up before this wakeup (due to a
+ * signal) it will either see the message and continue …
*/
- for (;;) {
- /*
- * Pairs with writer barrier in pipelined_send
- * or expunge_all.
- */
- smp_rmb(); /* barrier (A) */
- msg = (struct msg_msg *)msr_d.r_msg;
- if (msg)
- break;
- /*
- * The cpu_relax() call is a compiler barrier
- * which forces everything in this loop to be
- * re-loaded.
- */
- cpu_relax();
- }
-
- /* Lockless receive, part 3:
- * If there is a message or an error then accept it without
- * locking.
- */
+ msg = (struct msg_msg *)msr_d.r_msg;
if (msg != ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN))
goto out_unlock1;
- /* Lockless receive, part 3:
- * Acquire the queue spinlock.
- */
+ /*
+ * … or see -EAGAIN, acquire the lock to check the message
+ * again.
+ */
ipc_lock_object(&msq->q_perm);
- /* Lockless receive, part 4:
- * Repeat test after acquiring the spinlock.
- */
msg = (struct msg_msg *)msr_d.r_msg;
if (msg != ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN))
goto out_unlock0;
--
2.6.2
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists