diff options
author | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2018-08-13 12:23:39 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> | 2018-08-13 12:23:39 -0700 |
commit | de5d1b39ea0b38a9f4dfb08966042b7b91e2df30 (patch) | |
tree | 3591bdac4fe6756b4e3dc68b2ed1c792c4104218 /Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | |
parent | 1c594774283a7cfe6dc0f8ffdfb2dbfc497502c4 (diff) | |
parent | fd2efaa4eb5317c3a86357a83a7d456a1b86a0ac (diff) | |
download | op-kernel-dev-de5d1b39ea0b38a9f4dfb08966042b7b91e2df30.zip op-kernel-dev-de5d1b39ea0b38a9f4dfb08966042b7b91e2df30.tar.gz |
Merge branch 'locking-core-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull locking/atomics update from Thomas Gleixner:
"The locking, atomics and memory model brains delivered:
- A larger update to the atomics code which reworks the ordering
barriers, consolidates the atomic primitives, provides the new
atomic64_fetch_add_unless() primitive and cleans up the include
hell.
- Simplify cmpxchg() instrumentation and add instrumentation for
xchg() and cmpxchg_double().
- Updates to the memory model and documentation"
* 'locking-core-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (48 commits)
locking/atomics: Rework ordering barriers
locking/atomics: Instrument cmpxchg_double*()
locking/atomics: Instrument xchg()
locking/atomics: Simplify cmpxchg() instrumentation
locking/atomics/x86: Reduce arch_cmpxchg64*() instrumentation
tools/memory-model: Rename litmus tests to comply to norm7
tools/memory-model/Documentation: Fix typo, smb->smp
sched/Documentation: Update wake_up() & co. memory-barrier guarantees
locking/spinlock, sched/core: Clarify requirements for smp_mb__after_spinlock()
sched/core: Use smp_mb() in wake_woken_function()
tools/memory-model: Add informal LKMM documentation to MAINTAINERS
locking/atomics/Documentation: Describe atomic_set() as a write operation
tools/memory-model: Make scripts executable
tools/memory-model: Remove ACCESS_ONCE() from model
tools/memory-model: Remove ACCESS_ONCE() from recipes
locking/memory-barriers.txt/kokr: Update Korean translation to fix broken DMA vs. MMIO ordering example
MAINTAINERS: Add Daniel Lustig as an LKMM reviewer
tools/memory-model: Fix ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce name
tools/memory-model: Add litmus test for full multicopy atomicity
locking/refcount: Always allow checked forms
...
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/memory-barriers.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 43 |
1 files changed, 27 insertions, 16 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt index a02d6bb..0d8d7ef 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -2179,32 +2179,41 @@ or: event_indicated = 1; wake_up_process(event_daemon); -A write memory barrier is implied by wake_up() and co. if and only if they -wake something up. The barrier occurs before the task state is cleared, and so -sits between the STORE to indicate the event and the STORE to set TASK_RUNNING: +A general memory barrier is executed by wake_up() if it wakes something up. +If it doesn't wake anything up then a memory barrier may or may not be +executed; you must not rely on it. The barrier occurs before the task state +is accessed, in particular, it sits between the STORE to indicate the event +and the STORE to set TASK_RUNNING: - CPU 1 CPU 2 + CPU 1 (Sleeper) CPU 2 (Waker) =============================== =============================== set_current_state(); STORE event_indicated smp_store_mb(); wake_up(); - STORE current->state <write barrier> - <general barrier> STORE current->state - LOAD event_indicated + STORE current->state ... + <general barrier> <general barrier> + LOAD event_indicated if ((LOAD task->state) & TASK_NORMAL) + STORE task->state -To repeat, this write memory barrier is present if and only if something -is actually awakened. To see this, consider the following sequence of -events, where X and Y are both initially zero: +where "task" is the thread being woken up and it equals CPU 1's "current". + +To repeat, a general memory barrier is guaranteed to be executed by wake_up() +if something is actually awakened, but otherwise there is no such guarantee. +To see this, consider the following sequence of events, where X and Y are both +initially zero: CPU 1 CPU 2 =============================== =============================== - X = 1; STORE event_indicated + X = 1; Y = 1; smp_mb(); wake_up(); - Y = 1; wait_event(wq, Y == 1); - wake_up(); load from Y sees 1, no memory barrier - load from X might see 0 + LOAD Y LOAD X + +If a wakeup does occur, one (at least) of the two loads must see 1. If, on +the other hand, a wakeup does not occur, both loads might see 0. -In contrast, if a wakeup does occur, CPU 2's load from X would be guaranteed -to see 1. +wake_up_process() always executes a general memory barrier. The barrier again +occurs before the task state is accessed. In particular, if the wake_up() in +the previous snippet were replaced by a call to wake_up_process() then one of +the two loads would be guaranteed to see 1. The available waker functions include: @@ -2224,6 +2233,8 @@ The available waker functions include: wake_up_poll(); wake_up_process(); +In terms of memory ordering, these functions all provide the same guarantees of +a wake_up() (or stronger). [!] Note that the memory barriers implied by the sleeper and the waker do _not_ order multiple stores before the wake-up with respect to loads of those stored |