Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Jul 2017 22:29:55 +0800 | From | Boqun Feng <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/5] sys_membarrier: Add expedited option |
| |
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 07:16:33AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 09:55:51PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > > I have a side question out of curiosity: > > > > How does synchronize_sched() work properly for sys_membarrier()? > > > > sys_membarrier() requires every other CPU does a smp_mb() before it > > returns, and I know synchronize_sched() will wait until all CPUs running > > a kernel thread do a context-switch, which has a smp_mb(). However, I > > believe sched flavor RCU treat CPU running a user thread as a quiesent > > state, so synchronize_sched() could return without that CPU does a > > context switch. > > > > So why could we use synchronize_sched() for sys_membarrier()? > > > > In particular, could the following happens? > > > > CPU 0: CPU 1: > > ========================= ========================== > > <in user space> <in user space> > > {read Y}(reordered) <------------------------------+ > > store Y; | > > read X; --------------------------------------+ | > > sys_membarrier(): <timer interrupt> | | > > synchronize_sched(); update_process_times(user): //user == true | | > > rcu_check_callbacks(usr): | | > > if (user || ..) { | | > > rcu_sched_qs() | | > > ... | | > > <report quesient state in softirq> | | > > The reporting of the quiescent state will acquire the leaf rcu_node > structure's lock, with an smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), which will > one way or another be a full memory barrier. So the reorderings > cannot happen. > > Unless I am missing something subtle. ;-) >
Well, smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() in ARM64 is a no-op, and ARM64's lock doesn't provide a smp_mb().
So my point is more like: synchronize_sched() happens to be a sys_membarrier() because of some implementation detail, and if some day we come up with a much cheaper way to implement sched flavor RCU(hopefully!), synchronize_sched() may be not good for the job. So at least, we'd better document this somewhere?
Regards, Boqun
> Thanx, Paul > > > <return to user space> | | > > read Y; --------------------------------------+----+ > > store X; | > > {read X}(reordered) <-------------------------+ > > > > I assume the timer interrupt handler, which interrupts a user space and > > reports a quiesent state for sched flavor RCU, may not have a smp_mb() > > in some code path. > > > > I may miss something subtle, but it just not very obvious how > > synchronize_sched() will guarantee a remote CPU running in userspace to > > do a smp_mb() before it returns, this is at least not in RCU > > requirements, right? > > > > Regards, > > Boqun > > [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |