lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 4/7] x86: use exit_lazy_tlb rather than membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode
    On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 08:04:27PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:

    > That being said, the x86 sync core gap that I imagined could be fixed
    > by changing to rq->curr == rq->idle test does not actually exist because
    > the global membarrier does not have a sync core option. So fixing the
    > exit_lazy_tlb points that this series does *should* fix that. So
    > PF_KTHREAD may be less problematic than I thought from implementation
    > point of view, only semantics.

    So I've been trying to figure out where that PF_KTHREAD comes from,
    commit 227a4aadc75b ("sched/membarrier: Fix p->mm->membarrier_state racy
    load") changed 'p->mm' to '!(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)'.

    So the first version:

    https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190906031300.1647-5-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com

    appears to unconditionally send the IPI and checks p->mm in the IPI
    context, but then v2:

    https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190908134909.12389-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com

    has the current code. But I've been unable to find the reason the
    'p->mm' test changed into '!(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)'.

    The comment doesn't really help either; sure we have the whole lazy mm
    thing, but that's ->active_mm, not ->mm.

    Possibly it is because {,un}use_mm() do not have sufficient barriers to
    make the remote p->mm test work? Or were we over-eager with the !p->mm
    doesn't imply kthread 'cleanups' at the time?

    Also, I just realized, I still have a fix for use_mm() now
    kthread_use_mm() that seems to have been lost.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-07-21 17:07    [W:5.289 / U:0.304 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site