On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 03:56:31PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Document the membarrier requirement on having a full memory barrier in
> __schedule() after coming from user-space, before storing to rq->curr.
> It is provided by smp_mb__before_spinlock() in __schedule().

It is smp_mb__after_spinlock(). (Yes: I missed it in my previous email.)

  Andrea


> 
> Document that membarrier requires a full barrier on transition from
> kernel thread to userspace thread. We currently have an implicit barrier
> from atomic_dec_and_test() in mmdrop() that ensures this.
> 
> The x86 switch_mm_irqs_off() full barrier is currently provided by many
> cpumask update operations as well as write_cr3(). Document that
> write_cr3() provides this barrier.
> 
> Changes since v1:
> - Update comments to match reality for code paths which are after
>   storing to rq->curr, before returning to user-space.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com>
> CC: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> CC: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> CC: Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com>
> CC: Andrew Hunter <a...@google.com>
> CC: Maged Michael <maged.mich...@gmail.com>
> CC: gro...@google.com
> CC: Avi Kivity <a...@scylladb.com>
> CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
> CC: Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org>
> CC: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
> CC: Dave Watson <davejwat...@fb.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/tlb.c        | 5 +++++
>  include/linux/sched/mm.h | 5 +++++
>  kernel/sched/core.c      | 9 +++++++++
>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> index 1ab3821f9e26..74f94fe4aded 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> @@ -144,6 +144,11 @@ void switch_mm_irqs_off(struct mm_struct *prev, struct 
> mm_struct *next,
>       }
>  #endif
>  
> +     /*
> +      * The membarrier system call requires a full memory barrier
> +      * before returning to user-space, after storing to rq->curr.
> +      * Writing to CR3 provides that full memory barrier.
> +      */
>       if (real_prev == next) {
>               VM_BUG_ON(this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.ctxs[prev_asid].ctx_id) !=
>                         next->context.ctx_id);
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/mm.h b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> index 3a19c253bdb1..766cc47c4d7c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> @@ -38,6 +38,11 @@ static inline void mmgrab(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  extern void __mmdrop(struct mm_struct *);
>  static inline void mmdrop(struct mm_struct *mm)
>  {
> +     /*
> +      * The implicit full barrier implied by atomic_dec_and_test is
> +      * required by the membarrier system call before returning to
> +      * user-space, after storing to rq->curr.
> +      */
>       if (unlikely(atomic_dec_and_test(&mm->mm_count)))
>               __mmdrop(mm);
>  }
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 18a6966567da..7977b25acf54 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2658,6 +2658,12 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct 
> task_struct *prev)
>       finish_arch_post_lock_switch();
>  
>       fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
> +     /*
> +      * When transitioning from a kernel thread to a userspace
> +      * thread, mmdrop()'s implicit full barrier is required by the
> +      * membarrier system call, because the current active_mm can
> +      * become the current mm without going through switch_mm().
> +      */
>       if (mm)
>               mmdrop(mm);
>       if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
> @@ -3299,6 +3305,9 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(bool preempt)
>        * Make sure that signal_pending_state()->signal_pending() below
>        * can't be reordered with __set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
>        * done by the caller to avoid the race with signal_wake_up().
> +      *
> +      * The membarrier system call requires a full memory barrier
> +      * after coming from user-space, before storing to rq->curr.
>        */
>       rq_lock(rq, &rf);
>       smp_mb__after_spinlock();
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 

Reply via email to