linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 3/5] irqchip/riscv-imsic: Use wmb() to order normal writes and IPI writes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPYmKFsTEzs2tPoCYwyj-BXEsfPMs+0XiNEUM+gRORpYbHE4dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:07:06 +0800
From: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@...edance.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc: daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de, paul.walmsley@...ive.com, 
	palmer@...belt.com, lihangjing@...edance.com, xieyongji@...edance.com, 
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 3/5] irqchip/riscv-imsic: Use wmb() to
 order normal writes and IPI writes

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:59 PM Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:09 PM Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@...edance.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Anup,
> >
> > I want to ensure when the receiver CPU traps into interrupt, it can
> > see all memory updates made by the sender before.
> >
> > The smp_mb__after_atomic() uses 'fence rw, rw' which orders normal
> > memory reads/writes. The IMSIC write is actually IO writes and is not
> > ordered by it.
> >
> > So I worry in extreme cases, the receiver CPU can receive the IPI
> > first, see no updates to ipi_mux_pcpu->bits and return immediately.
> > Then this IPI will not be handled until another IPI comes.
>
> Using wmb() is still inappropriate because if you want to simply
> ensure IO writes are not ordered before the normal memory writes
> then just convert writel_relaxed() to write().

Got it. I will use writel() instead.

Thanks!

Xu Lu

>
> Regards,
> Anup
>
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Xu Lu
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:34 PM Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 8:39 PM Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@...edance.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > During an IPI procedure, we need to ensure all previous write operations
> > > > are visible to other CPUs before sending a real IPI. We use wmb() barrier
> > > > to ensure this as IMSIC issues IPI via mmio writes.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@...edance.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-imsic-early.c | 6 ++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-imsic-early.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-imsic-early.c
> > > > index 63097f2bbadf..c6317cb557fb 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-imsic-early.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-imsic-early.c
> > > > @@ -29,6 +29,12 @@ static void imsic_ipi_send(unsigned int cpu)
> > > >  {
> > > >         struct imsic_local_config *local = per_cpu_ptr(imsic->global.local, cpu);
> > > >
> > > > +       /*
> > > > +        * Ensure that stores to normal memory are visible to the other CPUs
> > > > +        * before issuing IPI.
> > > > +        */
> > > > +       wmb();
> > > > +
> > >
> > > The imsic_ipi_send() is called through ipi_mux_send_mask()
> > > which does smp_mb__after_atomic() before calling so no need
> > > for any barrier here. Also, barriers need to be in-pair so adding
> > > a single barrier at random location is inappropriate.
> > > (Refer, https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/kernel/irq/ipi-mux.c?h=v6.13-rc7#n78)
> > >
> > > Based on the above, this patch is not needed.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Anup