lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2] membarrier: expedited private command
----- On Jul 28, 2017, at 7:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:55:32AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> index e9785f7aed75..33f34a201255 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> @@ -2641,8 +2641,18 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct
>> *prev)
>> finish_arch_post_lock_switch();
>>
>> fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For CONFIG_MEMBARRIER we need a full memory barrier after the
>> + * rq->curr assignment. Not all architectures have one in either
>> + * switch_to() or switch_mm() so we use (and complement) the one
>> + * implied by mmdrop()'s atomic_dec_and_test().
>> + */
>> if (mm)
>> mmdrop(mm);
>> + else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMBARRIER))
>> + smp_mb();
>> +
>> if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
>> if (prev->sched_class->task_dead)
>> prev->sched_class->task_dead(prev);
>>
>>
>
>> a whole bunch of architectures don't in fact need this extra barrier at all.
>
> In fact, I'm fairly sure its only PPC.
>
> Because only ARM64 and PPC actually implement ACQUIRE/RELEASE with
> anything other than smp_mb() (for now, Risc-V is in this same boat and
> MIPS could be if they ever sort out their fancy barriers).
>
> TSO archs use a regular STORE for RELEASE, but all their atomics imply a
> smp_mb() and there are enough around to make one happen (typically
> mm_cpumask updates).
>
> Everybody else, aside from ARM64 and PPC must use smp_mb() for
> ACQUIRE/RELEASE.
>
> ARM64 has a super duper barrier in switch_to().
>
> Which only leaves PPC stranded.. but the 'good' news is that mpe says
> they'll probably need a barrier in switch_mm() in any case.

As I pointed out in my other email, I plan to do this:

--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2636,6 +2636,11 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
vtime_task_switch(prev);
perf_event_task_sched_in(prev, current);
finish_lock_switch(rq, prev);
+ /*
+ * The membarrier system call requires a full memory barrier
+ * after storing to rq->curr, before going back to user-space.
+ */
+ smp_mb__after_unlock_lock();
finish_arch_post_lock_switch();

fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
Thoughts ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-28 17:36    [W:0.117 / U:4.936 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site