On 08/30/2018 02:44 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> Back in 2016, Peter had fixed this file due to a problem I reported on ARC. See
>> commit f75d48644c56a ("bitops: Do not default to __clear_bit() for
>> __clear_bit_unlock()")
>> That made __clear_bit_unlock() use the atomic clear_bit() vs. non-atomic
>> __clear_bit(), effectively making clear_bit_unlock() and __clear_bit_unlock() same.
>>
>> This patch undoes that which could explain the issues you see. @Peter, @Will ?
> Right, so the thinking is that on platforms that suffer that issue,
> atomic_set*() should DTRT. And if you look at your spinlock based atomic
> implementation, you'll note that atomic_set() does indeed do the right
> thing.
>
> arch/arc/include/asm/atomic.h:108
For !LLSC atomics, ARC has always had atomic_set() DTRT even in the git revision
of 2016. The problem was not in atomics, but the asymmetric way slub bit lock etc
worked (haven't checked if this changed), i.e.
slab_lock() -> bit_spin_lock() -> test_and_set_bit() # atomic
slab_unlock() -> __bit_spin_unlock() -> __clear_bit() # non-atomic
And with v4.19-rc1, we have essentially reverted f75d48644c56a due to 84c6591103db
("locking/atomics, asm-generic/bitops/lock.h: Rewrite using atomic_fetch_*()")
So what we have with 4.19-rc1 is
static inline void __clear_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr, volatile unsigned long *p)
{
unsigned long old;
p += ((nr) / 32);
old = // some typecheck magic on *p
old &= ~(1UL << ((nr) % 32));
atomic_long_set_release((atomic_long_t *)p, old);
}
So @p is being r-m-w non atomically. The lock variant uses atomic op...
int test_and_set_bit_lock(unsigned int nr, volatile unsigned long *p)
{
...
old = atomic_long_fetch_or_acquire(mask, (atomic_long_t *)p);
....
}
Now I don't know why we don't see the issue with LLSC atomics, perhaps race window
reduces due to less verbose code itself etc..
Am I missing something still ?
-Vineet
