lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] Fix: trace sched switch start/stop racy updates
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 11:48:43AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Aug 21, 2019, at 8:33 AM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 06:23:10AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 11:32:01AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> >
> >> > and so it is using a store-pair instruction to reduce the complexity in
> >> > the immediate generation. Thus, the 64-bit store will only have 32-bit
> >> > atomicity. In fact, this is scary because if I change bar to:
> >> >
> >> > void bar(u64 *x)
> >> > {
> >> > *(volatile u64 *)x = 0xabcdef10abcdef10;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > then I get:
> >> >
> >> > bar:
> >> > mov w1, 61200
> >> > movk w1, 0xabcd, lsl 16
> >> > str w1, [x0]
> >> > str w1, [x0, 4]
> >> > ret
> >> >
> >> > so I'm not sure that WRITE_ONCE would even help :/
> >>
> >> Well, I can have the LWN article cite your email, then. So thank you
> >> very much!
> >>
> >> Is generation of this code for a 64-bit volatile store considered a bug?
> >> Or does ARMv8 exclude the possibility of 64-bit MMIO registers? And I
> >> would guess that Thomas and Linus would ask a similar bugginess question
> >> for normal stores. ;-)
> >
> > I'm calling this a compiler bug; the way I understand volatile this is
> > very much against the intentended use case. That is, this is buggy even
> > on UP vs signals or MMIO.
>
> And here is a simpler reproducer on my gcc-8.3.0 (aarch64) compiled with O2:
>
> volatile unsigned long a;
>
> void fct(void)
> {
> a = 0x1234567812345678ULL;
> }
>
> void fct(void)
> {
> a = 0x1234567812345678ULL;
> 0: 90000000 adrp x0, 8 <fct+0x8>
> 4: 528acf01 mov w1, #0x5678 // #22136
> 8: 72a24681 movk w1, #0x1234, lsl #16
> c: f9400000 ldr x0, [x0]
> 10: b9000001 str w1, [x0]
> 14: b9000401 str w1, [x0, #4]
> }
> 18: d65f03c0 ret
>
> And the non-volatile case uses stp (is it a single store to memory ?):
>
> unsigned long a;
>
> void fct(void)
> {
> a = 0x1234567812345678ULL;
> }
>
> void fct(void)
> {
> a = 0x1234567812345678ULL;
> 0: 90000000 adrp x0, 8 <fct+0x8>
> 4: 528acf01 mov w1, #0x5678 // #22136
> 8: 72a24681 movk w1, #0x1234, lsl #16
> c: f9400000 ldr x0, [x0]
> 10: 29000401 stp w1, w1, [x0]
> }
> 14: d65f03c0 ret
>
> It would probably be a good idea to audit other architectures, since this
> is done by the compiler backend.

That does seem like a very good idea!

Thanx, Paul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-21 18:14    [W:0.093 / U:1.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site