Kernel/linux-next
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git synced 2024-12-29 09:12:07 +00:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

ipc/sem.c: change memory barrier in sem_lock() to smp_rmb()

Browse Source 
When I fixed bugs in the sem_lock() logic, I was more conservative than
necessary.  Therefore it is safe to replace the smp_mb() with smp_rmb().
And: With smp_rmb(), semop() syscalls are up to 10% faster.

The race we must protect against is:

	sem->lock is free
	sma->complex_count = 0
	sma->sem_perm.lock held by thread B

thread A:

A: spin_lock(&sem->lock)

			B: sma->complex_count++; (now 1)
			B: spin_unlock(&sma->sem_perm.lock);

A: spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock);
A: XXXXX memory barrier
A: if (sma->complex_count == 0)

Thread A must read the increased complex_count value, i.e. the read must
not be reordered with the read of sem_perm.lock done by spin_is_locked().

Since it's about ordering of reads, smp_rmb() is sufficient.

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: update sem_lock() comment, from Davidlohr]
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Acked-by: Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
Manfred Spraul 2014-12-12 16:58:11 -08:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent a060bfe032
commit 2e094abfd1
1 changed files with 10 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

13
ipc/sem.c
View File

@ -326,10 +326,17 @@ static inline int sem_lock(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
/* Then check that the global lock is free */
if (!spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock)) {
/* spin_is_locked() is not a memory barrier */
smp_mb();
/*
* The ipc object lock check must be visible on all
* cores before rechecking the complex count. Otherwise
* we can race with another thread that does:
* complex_count++;
* spin_unlock(sem_perm.lock);
*/
smp_rmb();
/* Now repeat the test of complex_count:
/*
* Now repeat the test of complex_count:
* It can't change anymore until we drop sem->lock.
* Thus: if is now 0, then it will stay 0.
*/