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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C178EC04A95 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 03:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2B36D80008; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 23:58:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 263B280007; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 23:58:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 12B7180008; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 23:58:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C5080007 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 23:58:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4DDA0301 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 03:58:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80058114612.30.C48F20E Received: from mail-qt1-f173.google.com (mail-qt1-f173.google.com [209.85.160.173]) by imf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7752310002B for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2022 03:58:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt1-f173.google.com with SMTP id r19so6870891qtx.6 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 20:58:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lF0FOzyra0GLG3l8w3os7D3TSDroC4u5G5xxnWbgASY=; b=MPuWEKHz6RTBfkMCR68F8G3+sfyRyn18Un82bYIsDwgRhug5tJdkscZyv3TvWdsy/K OSi+QtnYb10GgRsbsT4eHWWdp154o1jJ2CDYpjVyovvb1DrnBGV7f2OgG/sG9PIINPIn yED8rnUu2bEIG7hsA9fH/QTICnGfIyUFuHmpIsk4zviyWDlRgQQNI+NDqXfC6cgIVKOD VOYkIzU7BkVermeg0wkHxmmX5mRRF+QKpwkGqtHicul4KKBAlj3KvDziGDuZ+Lbgu4xT ckRHLJYnETb4aPRH3sAoARLlbQnZQ68sA4luYR24U8gM9GLZMdpayBJllElybOmz0Ds9 tE5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lF0FOzyra0GLG3l8w3os7D3TSDroC4u5G5xxnWbgASY=; b=BehgYMn/VPCBRVDnKCaOYhSvNVYWEaoWbPQ5T/kiG7A8fBPRCSNEBZQob66DSnEbzz HMDCnojgxh1P4Z0hKXlLS2pa9+U19dGbA1CM/IE4dXIqOTDsb7QjVhWGkEX0fHYwBklS BSe8yUCCVKZ0aOP+PLGTPijYQ0dZtYN21QgVmc+v9Mco3o0MLstkuaFOKxPX56OKZGHb kNqNF2u4fD0452byfvX5uLpV91ny1o/eGmKfCQ2REOLqiwYB39VsQnYpFt9jEjlBM6Oo paW9CE3bo377bRqK5WFhaCCPZdltgCKPt4exZHkNF/lhShUvbclIIUBvtCSjyweVT2IY O0cA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf25HsLhZVQ9ZgM7AnvMhCkkHp4DUXyxcjU1HFjhYny8Oz8iFixb NNfYOOIxtEc1uR9V4MYQ6s+IyQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6PNYY/66fWp7yFfKQr/jYhKwwRE8zhOICbNGDutEYNvGqd0rRSff+W4AR9eR9SjpJvLajwGQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5cc9:0:b0:399:98dc:2c6b with SMTP id s9-20020ac85cc9000000b0039998dc2c6bmr30225835qta.549.1666670305584; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 20:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ripple.attlocal.net (172-10-233-147.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [172.10.233.147]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id br20-20020a05620a461400b006bbb07ebd83sm1247877qkb.108.2022.10.24.20.58.23 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 24 Oct 2022 20:58:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 20:58:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@ripple.attlocal.net To: Peter Zijlstra cc: Hugh Dickins , Will Deacon , x86@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, aarcange@redhat.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, jroedel@suse.de, ubizjak@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] mm/gup: Fix the lockless PMD access In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20221022111403.531902164@infradead.org> <20221022114424.906110403@infradead.org> <796cff9b-8eb8-8c53-9127-318d30618952@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1666670306; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=lF0FOzyra0GLG3l8w3os7D3TSDroC4u5G5xxnWbgASY=; b=nx9FhYOi6ZZlgXuUYV+Fi9Bs+D/gnAZa8TCeh1UW772GGyZFpxSg79+BgcnudN8gt+ejZa 0FDSYMy2S17Xr66LWppxHvc7myVYpPNhGAFLrA4DaSRaWP/HewuJes4HU7f3Wb5bE/ufuB EMNaduhWazhDyjOh7GpurPt4agyF0Y0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf14.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=MPuWEKHz; spf=pass (imf14.hostedemail.com: domain of hughd@google.com designates 209.85.160.173 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hughd@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1666670306; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Ta4WhbW70u75xkqYdLTimrJ1bwDiVJxVHXWM4floEU9f9vRdywnwl/o+/DkKmhpTlX7YOn x4aZpDt7UqeeZ6oMTv58vAcorVWRaCBiks0qWiZZOaqJabXDNcc8hVr9jakjl6SQXJxmTb LZmk4uX7H8FrinEydsSrdCH9sdJMnHA= X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7752310002B X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf14.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=MPuWEKHz; spf=pass (imf14.hostedemail.com: domain of hughd@google.com designates 209.85.160.173 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hughd@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com X-Stat-Signature: t9w7j7qb6btataifzf54sasnagekrje1 X-HE-Tag: 1666670306-855983 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 Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 05:42:18PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Sat, 22 Oct 2022, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > On architectures where the PTE/PMD is larger than the native word size > > > (i386-PAE for example), READ_ONCE() can do the wrong thing. Use > > > pmdp_get_lockless() just like we use ptep_get_lockless(). > > > > I thought that was something Will Deacon put a lot of effort > > into handling around 5.8 and 5.9: see "strong prevailing wind" in > > include/asm-generic/rwonce.h, formerly in include/linux/compiler.h. > > > > Was it too optimistic? Did the wind drop? > > > > I'm interested in the answer, but I've certainly no objection > > to making this all more obviously robust - thanks. > > READ_ONCE() can't do what the hardware can't do. There is absolutely no > way i386 can do an atomic 64bit load without resorting to cmpxchg8b. Right. > > Also see the comment that goes with compiletime_assert_rwonce_type(). It > explicitly allows 64bit because there's just too much stuff that does > that (and there's actually 32bit hardware that *can* do it). Yes, the "strong prevailing wind" comment. I think I've never read that carefully enough, until you redirected me back there: it is in fact quite clear, that it's only *atomic* in the Armv7 + LPAE case; but READ_ONCEy (READ_EACH_HALF_ONCE I guess) for other 64-on-32 cases. > > But it's still very wrong. Somewhat clearer to me now, thanks. Hugh