From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Rohan McLure <rmclure@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
arnd@arndb.de, gautam@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic/mmiowb: Mark accesses to fix KCSAN warnings
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:17:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240419131744.GB3148@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240404043855.640578-2-rmclure@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 03:38:53PM +1100, Rohan McLure wrote:
> Prior to this patch, data races are detectable by KCSAN of the following
> forms:
>
> [1] Asynchronous calls to mmiowb_set_pending() from an interrupt context
> or otherwise outside of a critical section
> [2] Interrupted critical sections, where the interrupt will itself
> acquire a lock
>
> In case [1], calling context does not need an mmiowb() call to be
> issued, otherwise it would do so itself. Such calls to
> mmiowb_set_pending() are either idempotent or no-ops.
>
> In case [2], irrespective of when the interrupt occurs, the interrupt
> will acquire and release its locks prior to its return, nesting_count
> will continue balanced. In the worst case, the interrupted critical
> section during a mmiowb_spin_unlock() call observes an mmiowb to be
> pending and afterward is interrupted, leading to an extraneous call to
> mmiowb(). This data race is clearly innocuous.
>
> Resolve KCSAN warnings of type [1] by means of READ_ONCE, WRITE_ONCE.
> As increments and decrements to nesting_count are balanced by interrupt
> contexts, resolve type [2] warnings by simply revoking instrumentation,
> with data_race() rather than READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE(), the memory
> consistency semantics of plain-accesses will still lead to correct
> behaviour.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rohan McLure <rmclure@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> Reported-by: Gautam Menghani <gautam@linux.ibm.com>
> Tested-by: Gautam Menghani <gautam@linux.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> Previously discussed here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20230510033117.1395895-4-rmclure@linux.ibm.com/
> But pushed back due to affecting other architectures. Reissuing, to
> linuxppc-dev, as it does not enact a functional change.
> ---
> include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h | 15 +++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
> index 5698fca3bf56..f8c7c8a84e9e 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
> @@ -37,25 +37,28 @@ static inline void mmiowb_set_pending(void)
> struct mmiowb_state *ms = __mmiowb_state();
>
> if (likely(ms->nesting_count))
> - ms->mmiowb_pending = ms->nesting_count;
> + WRITE_ONCE(ms->mmiowb_pending, ms->nesting_count);
> }
>
> static inline void mmiowb_spin_lock(void)
> {
> struct mmiowb_state *ms = __mmiowb_state();
> - ms->nesting_count++;
> +
> + /* Increment need not be atomic. Nestedness is balanced over interrupts. */
> + data_race(ms->nesting_count++);
> }
>
> static inline void mmiowb_spin_unlock(void)
> {
> struct mmiowb_state *ms = __mmiowb_state();
> + u16 pending = READ_ONCE(ms->mmiowb_pending);
>
> - if (unlikely(ms->mmiowb_pending)) {
> - ms->mmiowb_pending = 0;
> + WRITE_ONCE(ms->mmiowb_pending, 0);
Why are you changing this store to be unconditional?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-19 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-04 4:38 [PATCH] asm-generic/mmiowb: Mark accesses to fix KCSAN warnings Rohan McLure
2024-04-19 13:17 ` Will Deacon [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-07-26 5:56 Rohan McLure
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240419131744.GB3148@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=gautam@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=rmclure@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).