On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 02:23:04PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
[...]
> >>
> >> copy_mm() is performed without holding current->sighand->siglock, so
> >> it appears to be racing with concurrent membarrier register cmd.
> >
> > Speak of racing, I think we currently have a problem if we do a
> > register_private_expedited in one thread and do a
> > membarrer_private_expedited in another thread(sharing the same mm), as
> > follow:
> >
> > {t1,t2,t3 sharing the same ->mm}
> > CPU 0 CPU 1 CPU2
> > ==================== ===================
> > ============
> > {in thread t1}
> > membarrier_register_private_expedited():
> > ...
> > WRITE_ONCE(->mm->membarrier_private_expedited, 1);
> > membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited():
> > ...
> > <haven't set the TIF for t3 yet>
> >
> > {in thread t2}
> > membarrier_private_expedited():
> >
> > READ_ONCE(->mm->membarrier_private_expedited); // == 1
> > ...
> > for_each_online_cpu()
> > ...
> > <p is cpu_rq(CPU2)->curr>
> > if (p && p->mm == current->mm) //
> > false
> > <so no ipi sent to CPU2>
> >
> > {about
> > to switch to t3}
> >
> > rq->curr = t3;
> > ....
> >
> > context_switch():
> > ...
> >
> > finish_task_swtich():
> >
> > membarrier_sched_in():
> >
> > <TIF is not set>
> > //
> > no smp_mb() here.
> >
> > , and we will miss the smp_mb() on CPU2, right? And this could even
> > happen if t2 has a membarrier_register_private_expedited() preceding the
> > membarrier_private_expedited().
> >
> > Am I missing something subtle here?
>
> I think the problem sits in this function:
>
> static void membarrier_register_private_expedited(void)
> {
> struct task_struct *p = current;
>
> if (READ_ONCE(p->mm->membarrier_private_expedited))
> return;
> WRITE_ONCE(p->mm->membarrier_private_expedited, 1);
> membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited(p);
> }
>
> I need to change the order between WRITE_ONCE() and invoking
> membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited. If I issue the
> WRITE_ONCE after the arch code (which sets the TIF flags),
> then concurrent membarrier priv exped commands will simply
> return an -EPERM error:
>
> static void membarrier_register_private_expedited(void)
> {
> struct task_struct *p = current;
>
> if (READ_ONCE(p->mm->membarrier_private_expedited))
> return;
> membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited(p);
> WRITE_ONCE(p->mm->membarrier_private_expedited, 1);
> }
>
> Do you agree that this would fix the race you identified ?
> Yep, that will do the trick ;-) Regards, Boqun > Thanks, > > Mathieu >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
