From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93165C433DF for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 15:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A042076D for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 15:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b="K0GdpyhC" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 54A042076D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EC48E8D0027; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E9B608D0016; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DB1428D0027; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0229.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.229]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AAA8D0016 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743A7181AEF07 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 15:46:24 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77044365888.23.fear62_070beb526f03 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4128E37609 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 15:46:24 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: fear62_070beb526f03 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4877 Received: from mail.efficios.com (mail.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 15:46:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159EB295C14; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id Ync1L2q1T9lv; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA374295C12; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:22 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.efficios.com CA374295C12 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=efficios.com; s=default; t=1594914382; bh=vp71nmZTDnneRvjCieT0x9SqYt8j1qCXpo2gjxlL3so=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=K0GdpyhCRtALmYLXIh6DsJqf5JNfl+RI9XMaZP0aXJxChWcSX9OVVieyRrXb0RdNF /Jipc4A5/RnMwjqyEEjMbVvPgdIyqg6mfSDPHwU7+bVACA16/s7rBD/5S9Ry3GzbYz zozOXqGhRXMR7LQsMhcMdCiJxv4UqQcKzv23U33hh7+oS3VAGnpLQ7djUioTHcUXDS rK/z3rkvdslH/xm8AnVlglCB7mUKCwPJ2Wa5dCSeWU5gFMxAxZAqzIFqfrTeE61LmU I7C30UDlbJOPkIN+i5Daj+lxxaCposb7B788MeCho+Z3GlA44nFE/aH+PkU8QPciwE N4uKpWyshlp+Q== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at efficios.com Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id LKw2bNJbhb-0; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail03.efficios.com (mail03.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0E2295C10; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:46:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Mathieu Desnoyers To: Nicholas Piggin Cc: Anton Blanchard , Arnd Bergmann , linux-arch , linux-kernel , linux-mm , linuxppc-dev , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , x86 Message-ID: <1494299304.15894.1594914382695.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> In-Reply-To: <1594873644.viept6os6j.astroid@bobo.none> References: <20200710015646.2020871-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20200710015646.2020871-5-npiggin@gmail.com> <1594613902.1wzayj0p15.astroid@bobo.none> <1594647408.wmrazhwjzb.astroid@bobo.none> <284592761.9860.1594649601492.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <1594868476.6k5kvx8684.astroid@bobo.none> <1594873644.viept6os6j.astroid@bobo.none> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] x86: use exit_lazy_tlb rather than membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [167.114.26.124] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_3955 (ZimbraWebClient - FF78 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_3953) Thread-Topic: x86: use exit_lazy_tlb rather than membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode Thread-Index: cb6zdS0KPjkbq8hxmgetruE+ExgftQ== X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4128E37609 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: ----- On Jul 16, 2020, at 12:42 AM, Nicholas Piggin npiggin@gmail.com wrote: > I should be more complete here, especially since I was complaining > about unclear barrier comment :) > > > CPU0 CPU1 > a. user stuff 1. user stuff > b. membarrier() 2. enter kernel > c. smp_mb() 3. smp_mb__after_spinlock(); // in __schedule > d. read rq->curr 4. rq->curr switched to kthread > e. is kthread, skip IPI 5. switch_to kthread > f. return to user 6. rq->curr switched to user thread > g. user stuff 7. switch_to user thread > 8. exit kernel > 9. more user stuff > > What you're really ordering is a, g vs 1, 9 right? > > In other words, 9 must see a if it sees g, g must see 1 if it saw 9, > etc. > > Userspace does not care where the barriers are exactly or what kernel > memory accesses might be being ordered by them, so long as there is a > mb somewhere between a and g, and 1 and 9. Right? This is correct. Note that the accesses to user-space memory can be done either by user-space code or kernel code, it doesn't matter. However, in order to be considered as happening before/after either membarrier or the matching compiler barrier, kernel code needs to have causality relationship with user-space execution, e.g. user-space does a system call, or returns from a system call. In the case of io_uring, submitting a request or returning from waiting on request completion appear to provide this causality relationship. Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com