On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:48:22PM -0600, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 10:38:16AM -0600, Jack Steiner wrote:
> >
> > Here is a fix for a ugly race condition that occurs in wake_futex() on IA64.
> >
> > On IA64, locks are released using a "st.rel" instruction. This ensures that
> > preceding "stores" are visible before the lock is released but does NOT prevent
> > a "store" that follows the "st.rel" from becoming visible before the "st.rel".
> > The result is that the task that owns the futex_q continues prematurely.
> >
> > The failure I saw is the task that owned the futex_q resumed prematurely and
> > was context-switch off of the cpu. The task's switch_stack occupied the same
> > space of the futex_q. The store to q->lock_ptr overwrote the ar.bspstore in the
> > switch_stack. When the task resumed, it ran with a corrupted ar.bspstore.
> > Things went downhill from there.
> >
> > Without the fix, the application fails roughly every 10 minutes. With
> > the fix, it ran 16 hours without a failure.
>
> So what happened to what the comment 10 lines above your patch says?
>
> /*
> * The lock in wake_up_all() is a crucial memory barrier after
> * the list_del_init() and also before assigning to q->lock_ptr.
> */
>
> On PPC64, the spinlock unlock path has a sync in there for the very
> purpose of adding the write barrier. Maybe the ia64 unlock path is
> missing something similar?
On IA64, the "sync" instructions are actually part of the ld.acq ot st.rel
instructions that are used to set/clear spinlocks.
The program order of the instructions is:
cmpxchg.acq // set lock
..
.. do things
..
st.rel // release lock
st NULL -> lock_ptr // set flag to allow futex_q to be freed
IA64 implements fencing of ld.acq or st.rel instructions as one-directional
barriers.
For example, st.rel allows stores that FOLLOW the st.rel to be reordered
and become visible before the st.rel
(I hope this picture survives the various mailers)
ld |
st | | ^ ^
- fence - | |
st.rel --------------|-----|------------------- fence
| |
ld | |
st |
I don't understand PPC64 but I suspect it has different memory ordering semantics.
--
Thanks
Jack Steiner ([email protected]) 651-683-5302
Principal Engineer SGI - Silicon Graphics, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]