lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH RT 3/3] swait: Add smp_mb() after setting h->list
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>

The raw_spin_unlock() is not a full memory barrier. It only keeps
things from leaking past it, but does not prevent leaks from entering
the critical section. That is:

p = 1;

raw_spin_lock();
[...]
raw_spin_unlock();

y = x

Can turn into:

p = 1;

raw_spin_lock();

load x

store p = 1

raw_spin_unlock();

y = x

This means that the condition check in __swait_event() (and friends)
can be seen before the h->list is set.

raw_spin_lock();

load condition;

store h->list;

raw_spin_unlock();

And the other CPU can see h->list as empty, and this CPU see condition
as not set, and possibly miss the wake up.

To prevent this from happening, add an mb() after setting the h->list.

Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
kernel/wait-simple.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/wait-simple.c b/kernel/wait-simple.c
index 9725a11..2c85626 100644
--- a/kernel/wait-simple.c
+++ b/kernel/wait-simple.c
@@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
static inline void __swait_enqueue(struct swait_head *head, struct swaiter *w)
{
list_add(&w->node, &head->list);
+ /* We can't let the condition leak before the setting of head */
+ smp_mb();
}

/* Removes w from head->list. Must be called with head->lock locked. */
--
1.7.10.4



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-08-19 18:01    [W:0.124 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site