| 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: <20190903200249.GD4125@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 13:02:49 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
rcu@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rcu dev 1/2] Revert b8c17e6664c4 ("rcu: Maintain special
bits at bottom of ->dynticks counter")
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 12:23:47PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> This code is unused and can be removed now. Revert was straightforward.
>
> Tested with light rcutorture.
>
> Link: http://lore.kernel.org/r/CALCETrWNPOOdTrFabTDd=H7+wc6xJ9rJceg6OL1S0rTV5pfSsA@mail.gmail.com
> Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Some questions below.
> ---
> include/linux/rcutiny.h | 3 --
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 82 ++++++++++-------------------------------
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcutiny.h b/include/linux/rcutiny.h
> index b7607e2667ae..b3f689711289 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcutiny.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcutiny.h
> @@ -14,9 +14,6 @@
>
> #include <asm/param.h> /* for HZ */
>
> -/* Never flag non-existent other CPUs! */
> -static inline bool rcu_eqs_special_set(int cpu) { return false; }
> -
> static inline unsigned long get_state_synchronize_rcu(void)
> {
> return 0;
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 68ebf0eb64c8..417dd00b9e87 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -69,20 +69,10 @@
>
> /* Data structures. */
>
> -/*
> - * Steal a bit from the bottom of ->dynticks for idle entry/exit
> - * control. Initially this is for TLB flushing.
> - */
> -#define RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK 0x1
> -#define RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR (RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK + 1)
> -#ifndef rcu_eqs_special_exit
> -#define rcu_eqs_special_exit() do { } while (0)
> -#endif
> -
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rcu_data, rcu_data) = {
> .dynticks_nesting = 1,
> .dynticks_nmi_nesting = DYNTICK_IRQ_NONIDLE,
> - .dynticks = ATOMIC_INIT(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR),
> + .dynticks = ATOMIC_INIT(1),
> };
> struct rcu_state rcu_state = {
> .level = { &rcu_state.node[0] },
> @@ -229,20 +219,15 @@ void rcu_softirq_qs(void)
> static void rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter(void)
> {
> struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
> - int seq;
> + int special;
Given that we really are now loading a pure sequence number, why
change the name to "special"? This revert is after all removing
the ability of ->dynticks to be special.
> /*
> - * CPUs seeing atomic_add_return() must see prior RCU read-side
> + * CPUs seeing atomic_inc_return() must see prior RCU read-side
> * critical sections, and we also must force ordering with the
> * next idle sojourn.
> */
> - seq = atomic_add_return(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR, &rdp->dynticks);
> - /* Better be in an extended quiescent state! */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) &&
> - (seq & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR));
> - /* Better not have special action (TLB flush) pending! */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) &&
> - (seq & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK));
> + special = atomic_inc_return(&rdp->dynticks);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) && special & 0x1);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -252,22 +237,15 @@ static void rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter(void)
> static void rcu_dynticks_eqs_exit(void)
> {
> struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
> - int seq;
> + int special;
Ditto.
> /*
> - * CPUs seeing atomic_add_return() must see prior idle sojourns,
> + * CPUs seeing atomic_inc_return() must see prior idle sojourns,
> * and we also must force ordering with the next RCU read-side
> * critical section.
> */
> - seq = atomic_add_return(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR, &rdp->dynticks);
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) &&
> - !(seq & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR));
> - if (seq & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK) {
> - atomic_andnot(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK, &rdp->dynticks);
> - smp_mb__after_atomic(); /* _exit after clearing mask. */
> - /* Prefer duplicate flushes to losing a flush. */
> - rcu_eqs_special_exit();
> - }
> + special = atomic_inc_return(&rdp->dynticks);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG) && !(special & 0x1));
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -284,9 +262,9 @@ static void rcu_dynticks_eqs_online(void)
> {
> struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
>
> - if (atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks) & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR)
> + if (atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks) & 0x1)
> return;
> - atomic_add(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR, &rdp->dynticks);
> + atomic_add(0x1, &rdp->dynticks);
This could be atomic_inc(), right?
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -298,7 +276,7 @@ bool rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(void)
> {
> struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
>
> - return !(atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks) & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR);
> + return !(atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks) & 0x1);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -309,7 +287,7 @@ int rcu_dynticks_snap(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> {
> int snap = atomic_add_return(0, &rdp->dynticks);
>
> - return snap & ~RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK;
> + return snap;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -318,7 +296,7 @@ int rcu_dynticks_snap(struct rcu_data *rdp)
> */
> static bool rcu_dynticks_in_eqs(int snap)
> {
> - return !(snap & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR);
> + return !(snap & 0x1);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -331,28 +309,6 @@ static bool rcu_dynticks_in_eqs_since(struct rcu_data *rdp, int snap)
> return snap != rcu_dynticks_snap(rdp);
> }
>
> -/*
> - * Set the special (bottom) bit of the specified CPU so that it
> - * will take special action (such as flushing its TLB) on the
> - * next exit from an extended quiescent state. Returns true if
> - * the bit was successfully set, or false if the CPU was not in
> - * an extended quiescent state.
> - */
> -bool rcu_eqs_special_set(int cpu)
> -{
> - int old;
> - int new;
> - struct rcu_data *rdp = &per_cpu(rcu_data, cpu);
> -
> - do {
> - old = atomic_read(&rdp->dynticks);
> - if (old & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR)
> - return false;
> - new = old | RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_MASK;
> - } while (atomic_cmpxchg(&rdp->dynticks, old, new) != old);
> - return true;
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Let the RCU core know that this CPU has gone through the scheduler,
> * which is a quiescent state. This is called when the need for a
> @@ -366,13 +322,13 @@ bool rcu_eqs_special_set(int cpu)
> */
> void rcu_momentary_dyntick_idle(void)
> {
> - int special;
> + struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
> + int special = atomic_add_return(2, &rdp->dynticks);
>
> - raw_cpu_write(rcu_data.rcu_need_heavy_qs, false);
> - special = atomic_add_return(2 * RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR,
> - &this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data)->dynticks);
> /* It is illegal to call this from idle state. */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!(special & RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR));
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!(special & 0x1));
> +
> + raw_cpu_write(rcu_data.rcu_need_heavy_qs, false);
Is it really OK to clear .rcu_need_heavy_qs after the atomic_add_return()?
> rcu_preempt_deferred_qs(current);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_momentary_dyntick_idle);
> --
> 2.23.0.187.g17f5b7556c-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists