Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1400537
| From | Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? |
| Date | 2016-05-13 08:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ryf58-6fM-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi, I came across a piece of engineering code that looked like: preempt_disable(); /* --cut, lots of code-- */ preempt_enable_no_resched(); put_user() preempt_disable(); (If you wish to seriously question the usage of the preempt API in this manner, I unfortunately have no comment since I didn't write the code.) This particular block of code was causing lockups and crashes on a certain ARM64 device. The generated assembly revealed that the compiler was simply optimizing out the increment and decrement of the preempt count, allowing put_user to run without preemption enabled, causing all sorts of badness. Since put_user doesn't actually access the preempt count and translates to just a few instructions without any branching, I suppose that the compiler figured it was OK to optimize. The immediate solution is to add a compiler barrier to the code above, but should sched_preempt_enable_no_resched have an additional compiler barrier after (has one before already) the preempt-count decrement to prevent this sort of thing? Thanks, Vikram -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2016-05-13 08:50 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-05-13 16:30 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-13 17:00 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2016-05-14 00:50 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-05-14 17:50 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org> - 2016-05-14 20:30 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-16 13:00 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-16 13:10 +0200
Re: Additional compiler barrier required in sched_preempt_enable_no_resched? Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-05-16 15:20 +0200
[tip:sched/urgent] sched/preempt: Fix preempt_count manipulations tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2016-05-17 16:30 +0200
csiph-web