| 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: <1501541897-5225-9-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:58:16 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 09/10] locking: Remove spin_unlock_wait() generic definitions
There is no agreed-upon definition of spin_unlock_wait()'s semantics,
and it appears that all callers could do just as well with a lock/unlock
pair. This commit therefore removes spin_unlock_wait() and related
definitions from core code.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
---
include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h | 14 -----
include/linux/spinlock.h | 11 ----
include/linux/spinlock_up.h | 6 ---
kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 117 ----------------------------------------
4 files changed, 148 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h b/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
index 9f0681bf1e87..66260777d644 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
@@ -22,17 +22,6 @@
#include <asm-generic/qspinlock_types.h>
/**
- * queued_spin_unlock_wait - wait until the _current_ lock holder releases the lock
- * @lock : Pointer to queued spinlock structure
- *
- * There is a very slight possibility of live-lock if the lockers keep coming
- * and the waiter is just unfortunate enough to not see any unlock state.
- */
-#ifndef queued_spin_unlock_wait
-extern void queued_spin_unlock_wait(struct qspinlock *lock);
-#endif
-
-/**
* queued_spin_is_locked - is the spinlock locked?
* @lock: Pointer to queued spinlock structure
* Return: 1 if it is locked, 0 otherwise
@@ -41,8 +30,6 @@ extern void queued_spin_unlock_wait(struct qspinlock *lock);
static __always_inline int queued_spin_is_locked(struct qspinlock *lock)
{
/*
- * See queued_spin_unlock_wait().
- *
* Any !0 state indicates it is locked, even if _Q_LOCKED_VAL
* isn't immediately observable.
*/
@@ -135,6 +122,5 @@ static __always_inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock)
#define arch_spin_trylock(l) queued_spin_trylock(l)
#define arch_spin_unlock(l) queued_spin_unlock(l)
#define arch_spin_lock_flags(l, f) queued_spin_lock(l)
-#define arch_spin_unlock_wait(l) queued_spin_unlock_wait(l)
#endif /* __ASM_GENERIC_QSPINLOCK_H */
diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
index 59248dcc6ef3..ef018a6e4985 100644
--- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
+++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
@@ -130,12 +130,6 @@ do { \
#define smp_mb__before_spinlock() smp_wmb()
#endif
-/**
- * raw_spin_unlock_wait - wait until the spinlock gets unlocked
- * @lock: the spinlock in question.
- */
-#define raw_spin_unlock_wait(lock) arch_spin_unlock_wait(&(lock)->raw_lock)
-
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK
extern void do_raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock) __acquires(lock);
#define do_raw_spin_lock_flags(lock, flags) do_raw_spin_lock(lock)
@@ -369,11 +363,6 @@ static __always_inline int spin_trylock_irq(spinlock_t *lock)
raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(spinlock_check(lock), flags); \
})
-static __always_inline void spin_unlock_wait(spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- raw_spin_unlock_wait(&lock->rlock);
-}
-
static __always_inline int spin_is_locked(spinlock_t *lock)
{
return raw_spin_is_locked(&lock->rlock);
diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock_up.h b/include/linux/spinlock_up.h
index 0d9848de677d..612fb530af41 100644
--- a/include/linux/spinlock_up.h
+++ b/include/linux/spinlock_up.h
@@ -26,11 +26,6 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK
#define arch_spin_is_locked(x) ((x)->slock == 0)
-static inline void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->slock, VAL);
-}
-
static inline void arch_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
lock->slock = 0;
@@ -73,7 +68,6 @@ static inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
#else /* DEBUG_SPINLOCK */
#define arch_spin_is_locked(lock) ((void)(lock), 0)
-#define arch_spin_unlock_wait(lock) do { barrier(); (void)(lock); } while (0)
/* for sched/core.c and kernel_lock.c: */
# define arch_spin_lock(lock) do { barrier(); (void)(lock); } while (0)
# define arch_spin_lock_flags(lock, flags) do { barrier(); (void)(lock); } while (0)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index fd24153e8a48..294294c71ba4 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -268,123 +268,6 @@ static __always_inline u32 __pv_wait_head_or_lock(struct qspinlock *lock,
#define queued_spin_lock_slowpath native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
#endif
-/*
- * Various notes on spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait(), which are
- * 'interesting' functions:
- *
- * PROBLEM: some architectures have an interesting issue with atomic ACQUIRE
- * operations in that the ACQUIRE applies to the LOAD _not_ the STORE (ARM64,
- * PPC). Also qspinlock has a similar issue per construction, the setting of
- * the locked byte can be unordered acquiring the lock proper.
- *
- * This gets to be 'interesting' in the following cases, where the /should/s
- * end up false because of this issue.
- *
- *
- * CASE 1:
- *
- * So the spin_is_locked() correctness issue comes from something like:
- *
- * CPU0 CPU1
- *
- * global_lock(); local_lock(i)
- * spin_lock(&G) spin_lock(&L[i])
- * for (i) if (!spin_is_locked(&G)) {
- * spin_unlock_wait(&L[i]); smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
- * return;
- * }
- * // deal with fail
- *
- * Where it is important CPU1 sees G locked or CPU0 sees L[i] locked such
- * that there is exclusion between the two critical sections.
- *
- * The load from spin_is_locked(&G) /should/ be constrained by the ACQUIRE from
- * spin_lock(&L[i]), and similarly the load(s) from spin_unlock_wait(&L[i])
- * /should/ be constrained by the ACQUIRE from spin_lock(&G).
- *
- * Similarly, later stuff is constrained by the ACQUIRE from CTRL+RMB.
- *
- *
- * CASE 2:
- *
- * For spin_unlock_wait() there is a second correctness issue, namely:
- *
- * CPU0 CPU1
- *
- * flag = set;
- * smp_mb(); spin_lock(&l)
- * spin_unlock_wait(&l); if (!flag)
- * // add to lockless list
- * spin_unlock(&l);
- * // iterate lockless list
- *
- * Which wants to ensure that CPU1 will stop adding bits to the list and CPU0
- * will observe the last entry on the list (if spin_unlock_wait() had ACQUIRE
- * semantics etc..)
- *
- * Where flag /should/ be ordered against the locked store of l.
- */
-
-/*
- * queued_spin_lock_slowpath() can (load-)ACQUIRE the lock before
- * issuing an _unordered_ store to set _Q_LOCKED_VAL.
- *
- * This means that the store can be delayed, but no later than the
- * store-release from the unlock. This means that simply observing
- * _Q_LOCKED_VAL is not sufficient to determine if the lock is acquired.
- *
- * There are two paths that can issue the unordered store:
- *
- * (1) clear_pending_set_locked(): *,1,0 -> *,0,1
- *
- * (2) set_locked(): t,0,0 -> t,0,1 ; t != 0
- * atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(): t,0,0 -> 0,0,1
- *
- * However, in both cases we have other !0 state we've set before to queue
- * ourseves:
- *
- * For (1) we have the atomic_cmpxchg_acquire() that set _Q_PENDING_VAL, our
- * load is constrained by that ACQUIRE to not pass before that, and thus must
- * observe the store.
- *
- * For (2) we have a more intersting scenario. We enqueue ourselves using
- * xchg_tail(), which ends up being a RELEASE. This in itself is not
- * sufficient, however that is followed by an smp_cond_acquire() on the same
- * word, giving a RELEASE->ACQUIRE ordering. This again constrains our load and
- * guarantees we must observe that store.
- *
- * Therefore both cases have other !0 state that is observable before the
- * unordered locked byte store comes through. This means we can use that to
- * wait for the lock store, and then wait for an unlock.
- */
-#ifndef queued_spin_unlock_wait
-void queued_spin_unlock_wait(struct qspinlock *lock)
-{
- u32 val;
-
- for (;;) {
- val = atomic_read(&lock->val);
-
- if (!val) /* not locked, we're done */
- goto done;
-
- if (val & _Q_LOCKED_MASK) /* locked, go wait for unlock */
- break;
-
- /* not locked, but pending, wait until we observe the lock */
- cpu_relax();
- }
-
- /* any unlock is good */
- while (atomic_read(&lock->val) & _Q_LOCKED_MASK)
- cpu_relax();
-
-done:
- smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
-}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(queued_spin_unlock_wait);
-#endif
-
#endif /* _GEN_PV_LOCK_SLOWPATH */
/**
--
2.5.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists