lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] membarrier: Provide register expedited private command
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 04:02:06PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Oct 5, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 02:37:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 000000000000..b0d79a5f5981
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
> >> +void membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited(struct task_struct *p)
> >> +{
> >> + struct task_struct *t;
> >> +
> >> + if (get_nr_threads(p) == 1) {
> >> + set_thread_flag(TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED);
> >> + return;
> >> + }
> >> + /*
> >> + * Coherence of TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED against thread
> >> + * fork is protected by siglock.
> >> + */
> >> + spin_lock(&p->sighand->siglock);
> >> + for_each_thread(p, t)
> >> + set_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(t),
> >> + TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED);
> >
> > I'm not sure this works correctly vs CLONE_VM without CLONE_THREAD.
>
> The intent here is to hold the sighand siglock to provide mutual
> exclusion against invocation of membarrier_fork(p, clone_flags)
> by copy_process().
>
> copy_process() grabs spin_lock(&current->sighand->siglock) for both
> CLONE_THREAD and not CLONE_THREAD flags.
>
> What am I missing here ?
>
> >
> >> + spin_unlock(&p->sighand->siglock);
> >> + /*
> >> + * Ensure all future scheduler executions will observe the new
> >> + * thread flag state for this process.
> >> + */
> >> + synchronize_sched();
> >
> > This relies on the flag being read inside rq->lock, right?
>
> Yes. The flag is read by membarrier_arch_switch_mm(), invoked
> within switch_mm_irqs_off(), called by context_switch() before
> finish_task_switch() releases the rq lock.

I fail to graps the relation between this synchronize_sched() and rq->lock.

(Besides, we made no reference to rq->lock while discussing:

https://github.com/paulmckrcu/litmus/commit/47039df324b60ace0cf7b2403299580be730119b
replace membarrier_arch_sched_in with switch_mm_irqs_off )

Could you elaborate?

Andrea


>
> Is the comment clear enough, or do you have suggestions for
> improvements ?



>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
> >
> > > +}
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-06 00:02    [W:0.071 / U:7.468 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site