On 04/10/2018 01:22 PM, Waiman Long wrote: > It was observed occasionally in PowerPC systems that there was reader > who had not been woken up but that its waiter->task had been cleared. > > One probable cause of this missed wakeup may be the fact that the > waiter->task and the task state have not been properly synchronized as > the lock release-acquire pair of different locks in the wakeup code path > does not provide a full memory barrier guarantee. So smp_store_mb() > is now used to set waiter->task to NULL to provide a proper memory > barrier for synchronization. > > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com> > --- > kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c > index e795908..b3c588c 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c > @@ -209,6 +209,23 @@ static void __rwsem_mark_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem, > smp_store_release(&waiter->task, NULL); > } > > + /* > + * To avoid missed wakeup of reader, we need to make sure > + * that task state and waiter->task are properly synchronized. > + * > + * wakeup sleep > + * ------ ----- > + * __rwsem_mark_wake: rwsem_down_read_failed*: > + * [S] waiter->task [S] set_current_state(state) > + * MB MB > + * try_to_wake_up: > + * [L] state [L] waiter->task > + * > + * For the wakeup path, the original lock release-acquire pair > + * does not provide enough guarantee of proper synchronization. > + */ > + smp_mb(); > + > adjustment = woken * RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS - adjustment; > if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list)) { > /* hit end of list above */
Ping! Any thought on this patch? I am wondering if there is a cheaper way to apply the memory barrier just on architectures that need it. Cheers, Longman