Re: [PATCH] [PATCH] Gaurantee spinlocks implicit barrier for!PREEMPT_COUNT
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Mon Apr 08 2013 - 10:31:50 EST
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 15:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> That said, I can't remember ever having seen a BUG like this, even
> though !PREEMPT is (or at least was) the most popular distro setting.
It requires gcc reordering the code to where a preempt can happen inside
preempt_disable. And also put in a position where the preempt_disable
code it gets added matters.
Then if gcc does this, we need a page fault to occur with a get_user()
operation, which in practice seldom happens as most get user operations
are done on freshly modified memory.
And then, it would require the page fault to cause a schedule. This is
the most likely of the things needed to occur, but itself is not a
Then, the schedule would have to cause the data that is being protect by
the preempt_disable() to be corrupted. Either by scheduling in another
process that monkeys with the data. Or if it protects per-cpu data,
scheduling to another CPU (for the SMP case only).
If any of the above does not occur, then you wont see a bug. This is
highly unlikely to happen, but that's no excuse to not fix it. But it
probably explains why we never saw a bug report. Heck, it may have
happened, but it would be hard to reproduce, and just forgotten about.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/