linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] srcu: Yet more detail for srcu_readers_active_idx

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <8E05ED42-A391-48D3-97B3-FBD667E72D10@joelfernandes.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 16:42:15 -0500
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     paulmck@...nel.org
Cc:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        neeraj.iitr10@...il.com, urezki@...il.com, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] srcu: Yet more detail for srcu_readers_active_idx_check() comments



> On Dec 15, 2022, at 4:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 03:33:39PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:03 PM Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Paul,
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 2:58 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> If the first read section's srcu_read_unlock() and its corresponding
>>>>> smp_mb()  happened before the flip, then the increment of old idx
>>>>> would happen only once. The next srcu_read_lock() will read the new
>>>>> index. If the srcu_read_unlock() and it's corresponding smp_mb()
>>>>> happened after the flip, the old_idx will be sampled again and can be
>>>>> incremented twice. So it depends on how the flip races with
>>>>> srcu_read_unlock().
>>>> 
>>>> I do understand that a number of people like reasoning about
>>>> memory-barrier ordering, courtesy of the sequentially consistent portions
>>>> of the C and C++ memory models, but thinking in terms of the accesses
>>>> surrounding the memory barriers has been far less error-prone.
>>> 
>>> Sure, but we are already talking in terms of the access to idx right?
>>> That's what we're saying is visible by memory barriers and we are
>>> trying to reason here about the ordering (flip does the write to idx
>>> and followed by smp_mb(), and there is corresponding read of idx on
>>> the srcu_read_lock() side. So we are indeed talking in terms of
>>> access, but let me know if I missed something.
>>> 
>>>>> Also, since this is all hard to reason about I started making some
>>>>> diagrams, LOL. For your amusement, here is why need to scan both idx
>>>>> during grace period detection: https://i.imgur.com/jz4bNKd.png
>>>> 
>>>> Nice!
>>>> 
>>>> I suggest placing a gap between GP 2 and GP 3.  That way, you can make it
>>>> very clear that Reader 1's critical section starts after the end of GP 2
>>>> (thus clearly never blocking GP 2) and before GP 3 (thus possibly having
>>>> a reference to some data that is going to be freed at the end of GP 3).
>>>> 
>>>> I also suggest coloring Reader 1 red and Reader 2 green, given that the
>>>> color red generally indicates danger.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for these suggestions! I will make the update. I am planning to
>>> make a number of diagrams for other scenarios as well, as it helps
>>> visualize. Google drawing is nice for these. I am happy to share these
>>> with you all if there is interest :).
>> 
>> I made these updates, please see: https://i.imgur.com/hoKLvtt.png
>> 
>> Feel free to use the image for any purpose and thanks ;-)
> 
> Very good, thank you!
> 
> Would it be possible to have an arrow marked "X" or "reference to X"
> from the beginning of the 'Mark "x" for GC' box to the box labeled
> 'Enter RSCS (access "X")'?

I am currently away from desk. I shared the google drawing with you. Could you check and make the change, if that’s ok with you?

Thank you so much,

 - Joel

> 
>                            Thanx, Paul