On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 9:55 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2024, at 13:30, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 04:22:57PM +0000, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> >> include/asm-generic/rwonce.h | 2 +-
> >> include/linux/compiler_types.h | 8 +++++++-
> >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > This patch needs Cc:
> >
> > Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> > linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
>
> It also needs an update to the comment about why this is safe:
>
> >> +++ b/include/asm-generic/rwonce.h
> >> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
> >> * (e.g. a virtual address) and a strong prevailing wind.
> >> */
> >> #define compiletime_assert_rwonce_type(t) \
> >> - compiletime_assert(__native_word(t) || sizeof(t) == sizeof(long long), \
> >> + compiletime_assert(__native_word(t) || sizeof(t) == sizeof(__dword_type), \
> >> "Unsupported access size for {READ,WRITE}_ONCE().")
>
> As far as I can tell, 128-but words don't get stored atomically on
> any architecture, so this seems wrong, because it would remove
> the assertion on someone incorrectly using WRITE_ONCE() on a
> 128-bit variable.
READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() do not guarantee atomicity for double
word types. They only guarantee (c.f. include/asm/generic/rwonce.h):
* Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching reads or writes. The
* compiler is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of
* READ_ONCE and WRITE_ONCE, but only when the compiler is aware of some
* particular ordering. ...
and later:
* Yes, this permits 64-bit accesses on 32-bit architectures. These will
* actually be atomic in some cases (namely Armv7 + LPAE), but for others we
* rely on the access being split into 2x32-bit accesses for a 32-bit quantity
* (e.g. a virtual address) and a strong prevailing wind.
This is the "strong prevailing wind", mentioned in the patch review at [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241016130819.GJ3559746@xxxxxxxxxx/
FYI, Processors with AVX guarantee 128bit atomic access with SSE
128bit move instructions, see e.g. [2].
[2] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104688
Uros.
