Message-ID: <mhng-aab12f70-1f7d-4d64-9c19-b66e93f680db@palmer-si-x1c4>
Date:   Wed, 12 Jul 2017 10:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To:     boqun.feng@...il.com
CC:     Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, albert@...ive.com,
        yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com, mmarek@...e.com,
        will.deacon@....com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        jason@...edaemon.net, marc.zyngier@....com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jslaby@...e.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        mchehab@...nel.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au, fweisbec@...il.com,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mcgrof@...nel.org, dledford@...hat.com,
        bart.vanassche@...disk.com, sstabellini@...nel.org,
        daniel.vetter@...ll.ch, mpe@...erman.id.au, msalter@...hat.com,
        nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, james.hogan@...tec.com,
        paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ups.riscv.org
Subject:     Re: [PATCH 10/17] RISC-V: Atomic and Locking Code

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 05:40:49 PDT (-0700), boqun.feng@...il.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:31:23PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..b0a0c76e966a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (C) 2012 Regents of the University of California
>> + *
>> + *   This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>> + *   modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
>> + *   as published by the Free Software Foundation, version 2.
>> + *
>> + *   This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> + *   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> + *   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> + *   GNU General Public License for more details.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#ifndef _ASM_RISCV_BITOPS_H
>> +#define _ASM_RISCV_BITOPS_H
>> +
>> +#ifndef _LINUX_BITOPS_H
>> +#error "Only <linux/bitops.h> can be included directly"
>> +#endif /* _LINUX_BITOPS_H */
>> +
>> +#include <linux/compiler.h>
>> +#include <linux/irqflags.h>
>> +#include <asm/barrier.h>
>> +#include <asm/bitsperlong.h>
>> +
>> +#ifndef smp_mb__before_clear_bit
>> +#define smp_mb__before_clear_bit()  smp_mb()
>> +#define smp_mb__after_clear_bit()   smp_mb()
>> +#endif /* smp_mb__before_clear_bit */
>> +
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/__ffs.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/ffz.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/fls.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/__fls.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/find.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/sched.h>
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/ffs.h>
>> +
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/hweight.h>
>> +
>> +#if (BITS_PER_LONG == 64)
>> +#define __AMO(op)	"amo" #op ".d"
>> +#elif (BITS_PER_LONG == 32)
>> +#define __AMO(op)	"amo" #op ".w"
>> +#else
>> +#error "Unexpected BITS_PER_LONG"
>> +#endif
>> +
>
> So the test_and_{set,change,clear}_bit() have the similar semantics as
> cmpxchg(), so
>
>> +#define __test_and_op_bit(op, mod, nr, addr)			\
>> +({								\
>> +	unsigned long __res, __mask;				\
>> +	__mask = BIT_MASK(nr);					\
>> +	__asm__ __volatile__ (					\
>> +		__AMO(op) " %0, %2, %1"				\
>
> ... "aqrl" bit is needed here, and
>
>> +		: "=r" (__res), "+A" (addr[BIT_WORD(nr)])	\
>> +		: "r" (mod(__mask)));				\
>
> ... "memory" clobber is needed here.
>
>> +	((__res & __mask) != 0);				\
>> +})
>> +
>> +#define __op_bit(op, mod, nr, addr)				\
>> +	__asm__ __volatile__ (					\
>> +		__AMO(op) " zero, %1, %0"			\
>> +		: "+A" (addr[BIT_WORD(nr)])			\
>> +		: "r" (mod(BIT_MASK(nr))))
>> +
>> +/* Bitmask modifiers */
>> +#define __NOP(x)	(x)
>> +#define __NOT(x)	(~(x))
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value
>> + * @nr: Bit to set
>> + * @addr: Address to count from
>> + *
>> + * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.
>> + * It may be reordered on other architectures than x86.
>> + * It also implies a memory barrier.
>> + */
>> +static inline int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	return __test_and_op_bit(or, __NOP, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * test_and_clear_bit - Clear a bit and return its old value
>> + * @nr: Bit to clear
>> + * @addr: Address to count from
>> + *
>> + * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.
>> + * It can be reordered on other architectures other than x86.
>> + * It also implies a memory barrier.
>> + */
>> +static inline int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	return __test_and_op_bit(and, __NOT, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * test_and_change_bit - Change a bit and return its old value
>> + * @nr: Bit to change
>> + * @addr: Address to count from
>> + *
>> + * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.
>> + * It also implies a memory barrier.
>> + */
>> +static inline int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	return __test_and_op_bit(xor, __NOP, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * set_bit - Atomically set a bit in memory
>> + * @nr: the bit to set
>> + * @addr: the address to start counting from
>> + *
>> + * This function is atomic and may not be reordered.  See __set_bit()
>
> This is incorrect, {set,change,clear}_bit() can be reordered, see
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt, they are just relaxed atomics. But I
> think you just copy this from x86 code, so maybe x86 code needs help
> too, at least claim that's only x86-specific guarantee.

I went ahead and fixed our comments.

  https://github.com/riscv/riscv-linux/commit/38d727b99b9eb76fac533cebc23f89d364b7d60d

>
>> + * if you do not require the atomic guarantees.
>> + *
>> + * Note: there are no guarantees that this function will not be reordered
>> + * on non x86 architectures, so if you are writing portable code,
>> + * make sure not to rely on its reordering guarantees.
>> + *
>> + * Note that @nr may be almost arbitrarily large; this function is not
>> + * restricted to acting on a single-word quantity.
>> + */
>> +static inline void set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	__op_bit(or, __NOP, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * clear_bit - Clears a bit in memory
>> + * @nr: Bit to clear
>> + * @addr: Address to start counting from
>> + *
>> + * clear_bit() is atomic and may not be reordered.  However, it does
>> + * not contain a memory barrier, so if it is used for locking purposes,
>> + * you should call smp_mb__before_clear_bit() and/or smp_mb__after_clear_bit()
>> + * in order to ensure changes are visible on other processors.
>> + */
>> +static inline void clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	__op_bit(and, __NOT, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * change_bit - Toggle a bit in memory
>> + * @nr: Bit to change
>> + * @addr: Address to start counting from
>> + *
>> + * change_bit() is atomic and may not be reordered. It may be
>> + * reordered on other architectures than x86.
>> + * Note that @nr may be almost arbitrarily large; this function is not
>> + * restricted to acting on a single-word quantity.
>> + */
>> +static inline void change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	__op_bit(xor, __NOP, nr, addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * test_and_set_bit_lock - Set a bit and return its old value, for lock
>> + * @nr: Bit to set
>> + * @addr: Address to count from
>> + *
>> + * This operation is atomic and provides acquire barrier semantics.
>> + * It can be used to implement bit locks.
>> + */
>> +static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(
>> +	unsigned long nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>> +	return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);
>
> If you want, you can open code an "amoor.aq" here, because
> test_and_set_bit_lock() only needs an acquire barrier.
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * clear_bit_unlock - Clear a bit in memory, for unlock
>> + * @nr: the bit to set
>> + * @addr: the address to start counting from
>> + *
>> + * This operation is atomic and provides release barrier semantics.
>> + */
>> +static inline void clear_bit_unlock(
>> +	unsigned long nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
>> +{
>
> You need a smp_mb__before_atomic() here, because clear_bit() is only
> relaxed atomic. And clear_bit_unlock() is a release.

Makes sense.  I went ahead and added the aq and rl bits to the AMOs already in
these two:

  https://github.com/riscv/riscv-linux/commit/f3903a2b403522a8dafd5cbe850caa22755d6b5b

Powered by blists - more mailing lists