4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx> commit 49e9cf3f0c04bf76ffa59242254110309554861d upstream. According to memory-barriers.txt: > Any atomic operation that modifies some state in memory and returns > information about the state (old or new) implies an SMP-conditional > general memory barrier (smp_mb()) on each side of the actual > operation ... Which mean these operations should be fully ordered. However on PPC, PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER is the barrier before the actual operation, which is currently "lwsync" if SMP=y. The leading "lwsync" can not guarantee fully ordered atomics, according to Paul Mckenney: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/14/970 To fix this, we define PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER as "sync" to guarantee the fully-ordered semantics. This also makes futex atomics fully ordered, which can avoid possible memory ordering problems if userspace code relies on futex system call for fully ordered semantics. Fixes: b97021f85517 ("powerpc: Fix atomic_xxx_return barrier semantics") Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/synch.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/synch.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/synch.h @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static inline void isync(void) MAKE_LWSYNC_SECTION_ENTRY(97, __lwsync_fixup); #define PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER "\n" stringify_in_c(__PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER) #define PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER stringify_in_c(LWSYNC) "\n" -#define PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER "\n" stringify_in_c(LWSYNC) "\n" +#define PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER "\n" stringify_in_c(sync) "\n" #define PPC_ATOMIC_EXIT_BARRIER "\n" stringify_in_c(sync) "\n" #else #define PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html