linux-kernel - [PATCH rcu 3/6 v2] rcu/exp: Remove superfluous full memory barrier upon first EQS snapshot

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: <Zn1O2qKaIVOXniYH@pavilion.home>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 13:36:58 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: [PATCH rcu 3/6 v2] rcu/exp: Remove superfluous full memory barrier
 upon first EQS snapshot

When the grace period kthread checks the extended quiescent state
counter of a CPU, full ordering is necessary to ensure that either:

* If the GP kthread observes the remote target in an extended quiescent
  state, then that target must observe all accesses prior to the current
  grace period, including the current grace period sequence number, once
  it exits that extended quiescent state.

or:

* If the GP kthread observes the remote target NOT in an extended
  quiescent state, then the target further entering in an extended
  quiescent state must observe all accesses prior to the current
  grace period, including the current grace period sequence number, once
  it enters that extended quiescent state.

This ordering is enforced through a full memory barrier placed right
before taking the first EQS snapshot. However this is superfluous
because the snapshot is taken while holding the target's rnp lock which
provides the necessary ordering through its chain of
smp_mb__after_unlock_lock().

Remove the needless explicit barrier before the snapshot and put a
comment about the implicit barrier newly relied upon here.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index 8a1d9c8bd9f7..1dbad2442e8d 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -357,7 +357,21 @@ static void __sync_rcu_exp_select_node_cpus(struct rcu_exp_work *rewp)
 		    !(rnp->qsmaskinitnext & mask)) {
 			mask_ofl_test |= mask;
 		} else {
-			snap = rcu_dynticks_snap(cpu);
+			/*
+			 * Full ordering between remote CPU's post idle accesses
+			 * and updater's accesses prior to current GP (and also
+			 * the started GP sequence number) is enforced by
+			 * rcu_seq_start() implicit barrier, relayed by kworkers
+			 * locking and even further by smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()
+			 * barriers chained all the way throughout the rnp locking
+			 * tree since sync_exp_reset_tree() and up to the current
+			 * leaf rnp locking.
+			 *
+			 * Ordering between remote CPU's pre idle accesses and
+			 * post grace period updater's accesses is enforced by the
+			 * below acquire semantic.
+			 */
+			snap = ct_dynticks_cpu_acquire(cpu);
 			if (rcu_dynticks_in_eqs(snap))
 				mask_ofl_test |= mask;
 			else
-- 
2.45.2