mirror of https://gitee.com/openkylin/linux.git
locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock()
Since its inception, our understanding of ACQUIRE, esp. as applied to spinlocks, has changed somewhat. Also, I wonder if, with a simple change, we cannot make it provide more. The problem with the comment is that the STORE done by spin_lock isn't itself ordered by the ACQUIRE, and therefore a later LOAD can pass over it and cross with any prior STORE, rendering the default WMB insufficient (pointed out by Alan). Now, this is only really a problem on PowerPC and ARM64, both of which already defined smp_mb__before_spinlock() as a smp_mb(). At the same time, we can get a much stronger construct if we place that same barrier _inside_ the spin_lock(). In that case we upgrade the RCpc spinlock to an RCsc. That would make all schedule() calls fully transitive against one another. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
ff7a5fb0f1
commit
d89e588ca4
|
@ -367,5 +367,7 @@ static inline int arch_read_trylock(arch_rwlock_t *rw)
|
|||
* smp_mb__before_spinlock() can restore the required ordering.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
#define smp_mb__before_spinlock() smp_mb()
|
||||
/* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
|
||||
#define smp_mb__after_spinlock() smp_mb()
|
||||
|
||||
#endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -342,5 +342,8 @@ static inline void arch_write_unlock(arch_rwlock_t *rw)
|
|||
#define arch_read_relax(lock) __rw_yield(lock)
|
||||
#define arch_write_relax(lock) __rw_yield(lock)
|
||||
|
||||
/* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
|
||||
#define smp_mb__after_spinlock() smp_mb()
|
||||
|
||||
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
|
||||
#endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -38,6 +38,9 @@
|
|||
* Besides, if an arch has a special barrier for acquire/release, it could
|
||||
* implement its own __atomic_op_* and use the same framework for building
|
||||
* variants
|
||||
*
|
||||
* If an architecture overrides __atomic_op_acquire() it will probably want
|
||||
* to define smp_mb__after_spinlock().
|
||||
*/
|
||||
#ifndef __atomic_op_acquire
|
||||
#define __atomic_op_acquire(op, args...) \
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -130,6 +130,42 @@ do { \
|
|||
#define smp_mb__before_spinlock() smp_wmb()
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* This barrier must provide two things:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - it must guarantee a STORE before the spin_lock() is ordered against a
|
||||
* LOAD after it, see the comments at its two usage sites.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* - it must ensure the critical section is RCsc.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The latter is important for cases where we observe values written by other
|
||||
* CPUs in spin-loops, without barriers, while being subject to scheduling.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
|
||||
*
|
||||
* for (;;) {
|
||||
* if (READ_ONCE(X))
|
||||
* break;
|
||||
* }
|
||||
* X=1
|
||||
* <sched-out>
|
||||
* <sched-in>
|
||||
* r = X;
|
||||
*
|
||||
* without transitivity it could be that CPU1 observes X!=0 breaks the loop,
|
||||
* we get migrated and CPU2 sees X==0.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Since most load-store architectures implement ACQUIRE with an smp_mb() after
|
||||
* the LL/SC loop, they need no further barriers. Similarly all our TSO
|
||||
* architectures imply an smp_mb() for each atomic instruction and equally don't
|
||||
* need more.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Architectures that can implement ACQUIRE better need to take care.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
#ifndef smp_mb__after_spinlock
|
||||
#define smp_mb__after_spinlock() do { } while (0)
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* raw_spin_unlock_wait - wait until the spinlock gets unlocked
|
||||
* @lock: the spinlock in question.
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1967,8 +1967,8 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags)
|
|||
* reordered with p->state check below. This pairs with mb() in
|
||||
* set_current_state() the waiting thread does.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
smp_mb__before_spinlock();
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
|
||||
smp_mb__after_spinlock();
|
||||
if (!(p->state & state))
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3281,8 +3281,8 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(bool preempt)
|
|||
* can't be reordered with __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
|
||||
* done by the caller to avoid the race with signal_wake_up().
|
||||
*/
|
||||
smp_mb__before_spinlock();
|
||||
rq_lock(rq, &rf);
|
||||
smp_mb__after_spinlock();
|
||||
|
||||
/* Promote REQ to ACT */
|
||||
rq->clock_update_flags <<= 1;
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue