linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 18/19] ARC: [plat-eznps] replace sync with proper cpu barrier

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: <20151117122208.GX3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:22:08 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc:	gilf@...hip.com, talz@...hip.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cmetcalf@...hip.com, Noam Camus <noamc@...hip.com>,
	linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 18/19] ARC: [plat-eznps] replace sync with proper cpu
 barrier

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 05:07:38PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > as is ARC-SMP seems to have a _lot_ of superfluous
> > barriers many of which have no explanation yet (I'm thinking of those
> > extra smp_mb()s in the lock primitives).
> 
> Other than the lock primitives can u think of any more.

Not of the top of my head.

> I verified that with llock/scond based spinlocks, those smp_mb() can be safely
> removed.

Good!

> I didn't send that patch over yet as part of puzzle is why removing them
> in EX based locks causes hackbench to jitter on quad core builds. This required
> some perf investigation but that seems to be causing some sort of livelock with
> callgraph profiling which is what I'm debugging currently :-)

So there's two superfluous barriers right; the one before LOCK and the
one after UNLOCK. Does removing either cause the jitter? I'm thinking
that maybe its the smp_mb after UNLOCK that force flushes the store
buffer that helps (MIPS has something similar).

> BTW since we are on the topic we have this loop in stack unwinder which can
> potentially cause RCU stalls, actual lockups etc. I was planning to add the
> following - does that seem fine to you.

Worries me more than anything. How could you get stuck in there?
--
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/