On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 18:31 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 05:34:53PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 13:10 +0400, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > On 28.05.2013 04:12, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> > > > Adding a barrier() is probably what we want.
> > >
> > > I agree, inserting barrier() is also a correct and working fix.
> >
> > Yeah, but I can not find a clean way to put it inside the "for (;;)"
> >
> > for (barrier();;) ->
> >
> > error: expected expression before ‘__asm__’
> >
> > No user currently does :
> >
> > if (condition)
> > hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(tpos, pos, head, member)
> >
> > But who knows...
>
> I still have my earlier question, but I suggest "({ barrier(); XXX })"
> to put the barrier into the for loop, either in the second or third
> clause, where XXX was the original second or third clause.
>
>
Hmm, it doesn't work, I wanted to replace :
barrier();
for (expr1 ; expr2; expr3) {
by :
for ( some_clever_thing ; expr2; expr3) {
So barrier() should not be in second or third clause : it must be done
once and before "expr1".
Not a big deal anyway, we're not adding new
hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu() users :)
About your earlier question, I really don't know why compiler would
cache a memory read if we explicitly use barrier() to prevent this from
happening.
BTW Roman patch generates a double load as in :
2cb1: 49 8b 07 mov (%r15),%rax
2cb4: 49 8b 07 mov (%r15),%rax
...
2ea2: e8 f9 dc ff ff callq ba0 <sock_put>
2ea7: 8b 0c 24 mov (%rsp),%ecx
2eaa: e9 02 fe ff ff jmpq 2cb1 <udp4_lib_lookup2+0x91>
because of ACCESS_ONCE() used twice, once explicitly in
hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(), and once in rcu_dereference_raw()
While barrier();ptr = rcu_dereference(X); does generate a single load.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
