From 55eed755c6e30a89be3a791a6b0ad208aadd9bdc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 13:11:17 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] locking/seqcount: Re-fix raw_read_seqcount_latch() Commit 50755bc1c305 ("seqlock: fix raw_read_seqcount_latch()") broke raw_read_seqcount_latch(). If you look at the comment that was modified; the thing that changes is the seq count, not the latch pointer. * void latch_modify(struct latch_struct *latch, ...) * { * smp_wmb(); <- Ensure that the last data[1] update is visible * latch->seq++; * smp_wmb(); <- Ensure that the seqcount update is visible * * modify(latch->data[0], ...); * * smp_wmb(); <- Ensure that the data[0] update is visible * latch->seq++; * smp_wmb(); <- Ensure that the seqcount update is visible * * modify(latch->data[1], ...); * } * * The query will have a form like: * * struct entry *latch_query(struct latch_struct *latch, ...) * { * struct entry *entry; * unsigned seq, idx; * * do { * seq = lockless_dereference(latch->seq); So here we have: seq = READ_ONCE(latch->seq); smp_read_barrier_depends(); Which is exactly what we want; the new code: seq = ({ p = READ_ONCE(latch); smp_read_barrier_depends(); p })->seq; is just wrong; because it looses the volatile read on seq, which can now be torn or worse 'optimized'. And the read_depend barrier is also placed wrong, we want it after the load of seq, to match the above data[] up-to-date wmb()s. Such that when we dereference latch->data[] below, we're guaranteed to observe the right data. * * idx = seq & 0x01; * entry = data_query(latch->data[idx], ...); * * smp_rmb(); * } while (seq != latch->seq); * * return entry; * } So yes, not passing a pointer is not pretty, but the code was correct, and isn't anymore now. Change to explicit READ_ONCE()+smp_read_barrier_depends() to avoid confusion and allow strict lockless_dereference() checking. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Paul McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Fixes: 50755bc1c305 ("seqlock: fix raw_read_seqcount_latch()") Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160527111117.GL3192@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- include/linux/seqlock.h | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/seqlock.h b/include/linux/seqlock.h index 7973a821ac58..ead97654c4e9 100644 --- a/include/linux/seqlock.h +++ b/include/linux/seqlock.h @@ -277,7 +277,10 @@ static inline void raw_write_seqcount_barrier(seqcount_t *s) static inline int raw_read_seqcount_latch(seqcount_t *s) { - return lockless_dereference(s)->sequence; + int seq = READ_ONCE(s->sequence); + /* Pairs with the first smp_wmb() in raw_write_seqcount_latch() */ + smp_read_barrier_depends(); + return seq; } /** @@ -331,7 +334,7 @@ static inline int raw_read_seqcount_latch(seqcount_t *s) * unsigned seq, idx; * * do { - * seq = lockless_dereference(latch)->seq; + * seq = raw_read_seqcount_latch(&latch->seq); * * idx = seq & 0x01; * entry = data_query(latch->data[idx], ...); -- GitLab