[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180314175352.GP4064@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 18:53:52 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arc_usr_cmpxchg and preemption
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Well it is broken wrt the semantics the syscall is supposed to provide.
> Preemption disabling is what prevents a concurrent thread from coming in and
> modifying the same location (Imagine a variable which is being cmpxchg
> concurrently by 2 threads).
>
> One approach is to do it the MIPS way, emulate the llsc flag - set it under
> preemption disabled section and clear it in switch_to
*shudder*... just catch the -EFAULT, force the write fault and retry.
Something like:
int sys_cmpxchg(u32 __user *user_ptr, u32 old, u32 new)
{
u32 val;
int ret;
again:
ret = 0;
preempt_disable();
val = get_user(user_ptr);
if (val == old)
ret = put_user(new, user_ptr);
preempt_enable();
if (ret == -EFAULT) {
struct page *page;
ret = get_user_pages_fast((unsigned long)user_ptr, 1, 1, &page);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
put_page(page);
goto again;
}
return ret;
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists