[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87lfoienjp.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 17:20:26 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x2apic_wrmsr_fence vs. Intel manual
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> writes:
> as I generated a nice bug around fence vs. x2apic icr writes, I studied
> the kernel code and the Intel manual in this regard more closely. But
> there is a discrepancy:
>
> arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h:
>
> /*
> * Make previous memory operations globally visible before
> * sending the IPI through x2apic wrmsr. We need a serializing instruction or
> * mfence for this.
> */
> static inline void x2apic_wrmsr_fence(void)
> {
> asm volatile("mfence" : : : "memory");
> }
>
> Intel SDM, 10.12.3 MSR Access in x2APIC Mode:
>
> "A WRMSR to an APIC register may complete before all preceding stores
> are globally visible; software can prevent this by inserting a
> serializing instruction or the sequence MFENCE;LFENCE before the WRMSR."
>
> The former dates back to ce4e240c279a, but that commit does not mention
> why lfence is not needed. Did the manual read differently back then? Or
> why are we safe? To my reading of lfence, it also has a certain
> instruction serializing effect that mfence does not have.
The 2011 SDM says:
A WRMSR to an APIC register may complete before all preceding stores
are globally visible; software can prevent this by inserting a
serializing instruction, an SFENCE, or an MFENCE before the WRMSR.
Sigh....
Powered by blists - more mailing lists