On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 22:15 +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
quoted text
> 
> My head hurts. This needs some serious analysis before we can be sure it
> fixes all the races. With all these memory barriers, maybe the previous
> spinlocks weren't so bad after all :)
> 
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/smp.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/smp.c 2010-03-23 05:09:08.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/smp.c      2010-03-23 06:12:40.000000000 -0500
> @@ -193,6 +193,31 @@ void generic_smp_call_function_interrupt
>         list_for_each_entry_rcu(data, &call_function.queue, csd.list) {
>                 int refs;
>  
> +               /*
> +                * Since we walk the list without any locks, we might
> +                * see an entry that was completed, removed from the
> +                * list and is in the process of being reused.
> +                *
> +                * Just checking data->refs then data->cpumask is not good
> +                * enough because we could see a non zero data->refs from a
> +                * previous iteration. We need to check data->refs, then
> +                * data->cpumask then data->refs again. Talk about
> +                * complicated!
> +                */

But the atomic_dec_return() implies a mb, which is before
list_del_rcu(), also, the next enqueue will have a wmb in
list_rcu_add(), so it seems to me that if we issue an rmb it would be
impossible to see a !zero ref of the previous enlisting.

quoted text
> +               if (atomic_read(&data->refs) == 0)
> +                       continue;
> +
> +               smp_rmb();
> +
> +               if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, data->cpumask))
> +                       continue;
> +
> +               smp_rmb();
> +
> +               if (atomic_read(&data->refs) == 0)
> +                       continue;
> +
>                 if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, data->cpumask))
>                         continue;
>  
> @@ -446,6 +471,14 @@ void smp_call_function_many(const struct
>         data->csd.info = info;
>         cpumask_and(data->cpumask, mask, cpu_online_mask);
>         cpumask_clear_cpu(this_cpu, data->cpumask);
> +
> +       /*
> +        * To ensure the interrupt handler gets an up to date view
> +        * we order the cpumask and refs writes and order the
> +        * read of them in the interrupt handler.
> +        */
> +       smp_wmb();
> +
>         atomic_set(&data->refs, cpumask_weight(data->cpumask));

We could make this an actual atomic instruction of course..

quoted text
>         raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&call_function.lock, flags);
> 
> 


--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/