Message-ID: <3a298b64-dd7c-4a0d-950e-8e5b98b39fee@efficios.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2024 12:09:54 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman
 <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
 John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>,
 Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
 Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
 Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Lai Jiangshan
 <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, maged.michael@...il.com,
 Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
 Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, lkmm@...ts.linux.dev, Nikita Popov <github@...pov.com>,
 llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] Documentation: RCU: Refer to ptr_eq()

On 2024-09-29 17:51, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 07:16:08AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> Refer to ptr_eq() in the rcu_dereference() documentation.
>>
>> ptr_eq() is a mechanism that preserves address dependencies when
>> comparing pointers, and should be favored when comparing a pointer
>> obtained from rcu_dereference() against another pointer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
>> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
>> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
>> Cc: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
>> Cc: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
>> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
>> Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
>> Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
>> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>> Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
>> Cc: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>
>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
>> Cc: maged.michael@...il.com
>> Cc: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
>> Cc: Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
>> Cc: Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>
>> Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
>> Cc: lkmm@...ts.linux.dev
>> Cc: Nikita Popov <github@...pov.com>
>> Cc: llvm@...ts.linux.dev
>> ---
>> Changes since v0:
>> - Include feedback from Alan Stern.
>> ---
>>   Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst b/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
>> index 2524dcdadde2..9ef97b7ca74d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcu_dereference.rst
>> @@ -104,11 +104,12 @@ readers working properly:
>>   	after such branches, but can speculate loads, which can again
>>   	result in misordering bugs.
>>   
>> --	Be very careful about comparing pointers obtained from
>> -	rcu_dereference() against non-NULL values.  As Linus Torvalds
>> -	explained, if the two pointers are equal, the compiler could
>> -	substitute the pointer you are comparing against for the pointer
>> -	obtained from rcu_dereference().  For example::
>> +-	Use operations that preserve address dependencies (such as
>> +	"ptr_eq()") to compare pointers obtained from rcu_dereference()
>> +	against non-NULL pointers. As Linus Torvalds explained, if the
>> +	two pointers are equal, the compiler could substitute the
>> +	pointer you are comparing against for the pointer obtained from
>> +	rcu_dereference().  For example::
>>   
>>   		p = rcu_dereference(gp);
>>   		if (p == &default_struct)
>> @@ -125,6 +126,23 @@ readers working properly:
>>   	On ARM and Power hardware, the load from "default_struct.a"
>>   	can now be speculated, such that it might happen before the
>>   	rcu_dereference().  This could result in bugs due to misordering.
>> +	Performing the comparison with "ptr_eq()" ensures the compiler
>> +	does not perform such transformation.
>> +
>> +	If the comparison is against another pointer, the compiler is
>> +	allowed to use either pointer for the following accesses, which
>> +	loses the address dependency and allows weakly-ordered
>> +	architectures such as ARM and PowerPC to speculate the
>> +	address-dependent load before rcu_dereference().  For example::
>> +
>> +		p1 = READ_ONCE(gp);
>> +		p2 = rcu_dereference(gp);
>> +		if (p1 == p2)
>> +			do_default(p2->a);
>> +
>> +	The compiler can use p1->a rather than p2->a, destroying the
>> +	address dependency.  Performing the comparison with "ptr_eq()"
>> +	ensures the compiler preserves the address dependencies.
> 
> Bitter experience leads me to suggest a "// BUGGY" comment on the "if"
> statement in the above example, and a corrected code snippet right here.  :-/

Changing for the following:

+               p1 = READ_ONCE(gp);
+               p2 = rcu_dereference(gp);
+               if (p1 == p2)  /* BUGGY!!! */
+                       do_default(p2->a);
+
+       The compiler can use p1->a rather than p2->a, destroying the
+       address dependency.  Performing the comparison with "ptr_eq()"
+       ensures the compiler preserves the address dependencies.
+       Corrected code::
+
+               p1 = READ_ONCE(gp);
+               p2 = rcu_dereference(gp);
+               if (ptr_eq(p1, p2))
+                       do_default(p2->a);

> 
> Other than that, loks good!

Let me know if I should add an acked-by from you on this
documentation patch as well.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
>>   	However, comparisons are OK in the following cases:
>>   
>> @@ -204,6 +222,10 @@ readers working properly:
>>   		comparison will provide exactly the information that the
>>   		compiler needs to deduce the value of the pointer.
>>   
>> +	When in doubt, use operations that preserve address dependencies
>> +	(such as "ptr_eq()") to compare pointers obtained from
>> +	rcu_dereference() against non-NULL pointers.
>> +
>>   -	Disable any value-speculation optimizations that your compiler
>>   	might provide, especially if you are making use of feedback-based
>>   	optimizations that take data collected from prior runs.  Such
>> -- 
>> 2.39.2
>>

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists