Re: Linux-kernel examples for LKMM recipes
From: Alan Stern
Date: Fri Oct 13 2017 - 16:09:32 EST
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 03:44:07PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > This document lists the litmus-test patterns that we have been discussing,
> > > along with examples from the Linux kernel. This is intended to feed into
> > > the recipes document. All examples are from v4.13.
> > >
> > > 0. Single-variable SC.
> > >
> > > a. Within a single CPU, the use of the ->dynticks_nmi_nesting
> > > counter by rcu_nmi_enter() and rcu_nmi_exit() qualifies
> > > (see kernel/rcu/tree.c). The counter is accessed by
> > > interrupts and NMIs as well as by process-level code.
> > > This counter can be accessed by other CPUs, but only
> > > for debug output.
> >
> > I'm not sure that single-variable SC can really be represented by an
> > example. It gets used literally all over the kernel -- it's such a
> > large part of the way we think about computer programs that we rely on
> > it unconsciously.
> >
> > For example, the very first function in the very first C source file
> > in the kernel/ directory (namely, check_free_space() in kernel/acct.c)
> > includes this code:
> >
> > if (acct->active) {
> > u64 suspend = sbuf.f_blocks * SUSPEND;
> > do_div(suspend, 100);
> >
> > How do we know that the value which gets divided by 100 is
> > sbuf.f_blocks * SUSPEND and not the random garbage which was stored in
> > suspend's memory location before it was initialized? Answer:
> > per-variable SC.
> >
> > Okay, maybe that's not really applicable, since it doesn't involve
> > accesses to shared memory. Here's an example that does.
> > get_futex_key() in kernel/futex.c calls READ_ONCE(page->mapping) twice.
> > How do we know that the value retrieved by the second call was not
> > stored _earlier_ than the value retrieved by the first call?
> > Per-variable SC.
> >
> > > b. Between CPUs, I would put forward the ->dflags
> > > updates, but this is anything but simple. But maybe
> > > OK for an illustration?
> >
> > Pretty much any code that accesses the same shared variable twice on
> > the same CPU could be an example of per-variable SC. But I don't think
> > people would learn much by studying such examples.
>
> Perhaps the recipes document should just baldly state that any execution
> having only one thread and/or having only one variable will be fully
> ordered?
That wouldn't be a bad idea. (Although the part about only one thread
should be pretty obvious.)
Also, you have to be a little careful because the ordering of the
execution may not always agree with the ordering of the source code.
The compiler is allowed to evaluate the arguments to a function call,
for example, in any order it likes.
Alan