Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1493640
| From | "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability |
| Date | 2016-09-29 20:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <smO65-7D0-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <smM4i-6hY-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <smMH0-6yY-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <smNa1-6Yg-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <smNjI-71u-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <smNWq-7uF-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 11:04:44AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:23:22AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 06:10:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:03:08PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:58:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 08:54:01AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > > If two processes are related by a RELEASE+ACQUIRE pair, ordering can be
> > > > > > > broken if a third process overwrites the value written by the RELEASE
> > > > > > > operation before the ACQUIRE operation has a chance of reading it.
> > > > > > > This commit therefore updates the documentation to call this vulnerability
> > > > > > > out explicitly.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reported-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > + However, please note that a chain of RELEASE+ACQUIRE pairs may be
> > > > > > > + broken by a store by another thread that overwrites the RELEASE
> > > > > > > + operation's store before the ACQUIRE operation's read.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is the powerpc lwsync quirk, right? Where the barrier disappears
> > > > > > when it looses the store.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Or is there more to it? Its not entirely clear from the Changelog, which
> > > > > > I feel should describe the reason for the behaviour.
> > > > >
> > > > > If I've groked it correctly, it's for cases like:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > PO:
> > > > > Wx=1
> > > > > WyRel=1
> > > > >
> > > > > P1:
> > > > > Wy=2
> > > > >
> > > > > P2:
> > > > > RyAcq=2
> > > > > Rx=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Final value of y is 2.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is permitted on arm64. If you make P1's store a store-release, then
> > > > > it's forbidden, but I suspect that's not generally true of the kernel
> > > > > memory model.
> > > >
> > > > That is the one! And to Peter's point, powerpc does the same for the
> > > > example as shown. However, on powerpc, upgrading P1's store to release
> > > > has no effect because there is no earlier access for the resulting
> > > > lwsync to influence. For whatever it might be worth, C11 won't guarantee
> > > > ordering in that case, either. Nor will the current Linux-kernel memory
> > > > model. (Yes, I did just try it to make sure. Why do you ask?)
> > > >
> > > > So you guys are fishing for an expanded commit log, for example, like
> > > > the following? ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Thanx, Paul
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > If two processes are related by a RELEASE+ACQUIRE pair, ordering can be
> > > > broken if a third process overwrites the value written by the RELEASE
> > > > operation before the ACQUIRE operation has a chance of reading it, for
> > > > example:
> > > >
> > > > P0(int *x, int *y)
> > > > {
> > > > WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
> > > > smp_wmb();
> > > > smp_store_release(y, 1);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > P1(int *y)
> > > > {
> > > > smp_store_release(y, 2);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > P2(int *x, int *y)
> > > > {
> > > > r1 = smp_load_acquire(y);
> > > > r2 = READ_ONCE(*x);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Both ARM and powerpc allow the "after the dust settles" outcome (r1=2 &&
> > > > r2=0), as does the current version of the early prototype Linux-kernel
> > > > memory model.
> > >
> > > FWIW, ARM doesn't allow this and arm64 only allows it if P1 uses WRITE_ONCE
> > > instead of store-release.
> >
> > Good catch, apologies for the error. The following, then?
> >
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > If two processes are related by a RELEASE+ACQUIRE pair, ordering can be
> > broken if a third process overwrites the value written by the RELEASE
> > operation before the ACQUIRE operation has a chance of reading it, for
> > example:
> >
> > P0(int *x, int *y)
> > {
> > WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
> > smp_wmb();
> > smp_store_release(y, 1);
> > }
> >
> > P1(int *y)
> > {
> > WRITE_ONCE(*y, 2);
> > }
> >
> > P2(int *x, int *y)
> > {
> > r1 = smp_load_acquire(y);
> > r2 = READ_ONCE(*x);
> > }
> >
> > Both ARM and powerpc allow the "after the dust settles" outcome (r1=2 &&
> > r2=0), as does the current version of the early prototype Linux-kernel
>
> And the above needs to be (r1!=2 || r2 != 0)... Sigh!
Make that (y==2 && r1==2 && r2 == 0).
Any further bids? ;-)
Thanx, Paul
> > memory model.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-29 18:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2016-09-29 18:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-29 18:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2016-09-29 19:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 19:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 20:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-29 20:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 21:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-09-29 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-29 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 11:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 11:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 12:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-30 14:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 15:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-30 15:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2016-09-30 11:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-30 13:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 12:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-30 14:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-30 14:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH locking/Documentation 1/2] Add note of release-acquire store vulnerability "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-09-30 15:20 +0200
csiph-web