Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1218952
| From | Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [PATCH 3.16.y-ckt 112/130] ipc/sem.c: change memory barrier in sem_lock() to smp_rmb() |
| Date | 2015-09-04 15:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q4Z4p-39P-87@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <q4YUF-2WE-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
3.16.7-ckt17 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
commit 2e094abfd1f29a08a60523b42d4508281b8dee0e upstream.
When I fixed bugs in the sem_lock() logic, I was more conservative than
necessary. Therefore it is safe to replace the smp_mb() with smp_rmb().
And: With smp_rmb(), semop() syscalls are up to 10% faster.
The race we must protect against is:
sem->lock is free
sma->complex_count = 0
sma->sem_perm.lock held by thread B
thread A:
A: spin_lock(&sem->lock)
B: sma->complex_count++; (now 1)
B: spin_unlock(&sma->sem_perm.lock);
A: spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock);
A: XXXXX memory barrier
A: if (sma->complex_count == 0)
Thread A must read the increased complex_count value, i.e. the read must
not be reordered with the read of sem_perm.lock done by spin_is_locked().
Since it's about ordering of reads, smp_rmb() is sufficient.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: update sem_lock() comment, from Davidlohr]
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Acked-by: Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
[ luis: 3.16 prereq for:
3ed1f8a99d70 "ipc/sem.c: update/correct memory barriers" ]
Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>
---
ipc/sem.c | 13 ++++++++++---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index 068897b50ffa..f64efdd19586 100644
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -326,10 +326,17 @@ static inline int sem_lock(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
/* Then check that the global lock is free */
if (!spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock)) {
- /* spin_is_locked() is not a memory barrier */
- smp_mb();
+ /*
+ * The ipc object lock check must be visible on all
+ * cores before rechecking the complex count. Otherwise
+ * we can race with another thread that does:
+ * complex_count++;
+ * spin_unlock(sem_perm.lock);
+ */
+ smp_rmb();
- /* Now repeat the test of complex_count:
+ /*
+ * Now repeat the test of complex_count:
* It can't change anymore until we drop sem->lock.
* Thus: if is now 0, then it will stay 0.
*/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 3.16.y-ckt 112/130] ipc/sem.c: change memory barrier in sem_lock() to smp_rmb() Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com> - 2015-09-04 15:20 +0200
csiph-web