BMC/Intel-BMC/linux.git/Documentation/atomic_t.txt, branch dev-5.2

x86/atomic: Fix smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic()

2019-07-26T07:10:29+00:00

[ Upstream commit 69d927bba39517d0980462efc051875b7f4db185 ] Recent probing at the Linux Kernel Memory Model uncovered a 'surprise'. Strongly ordered architectures where the atomic RmW primitive implies full memory ordering and smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic() are a simple barrier() (such as x86) fail for: *x = 1; atomic_inc(u); smp_mb__after_atomic(); r0 = *y; Because, while the atomic_inc() implies memory order, it (surprisingly) does not provide a compiler barrier. This then allows the compiler to re-order like so: atomic_inc(u); *x = 1; smp_mb__after_atomic(); r0 = *y; Which the CPU is then allowed to re-order (under TSO rules) like: atomic_inc(u); r0 = *y; *x = 1; And this very much was not intended. Therefore strengthen the atomic RmW ops to include a compiler barrier. NOTE: atomic_{or,and,xor} and the bitops already had the compiler barrier. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

Documentation/atomic_t: Clarify signed vs unsigned

2019-03-18T17:27:52+00:00

Clarify the whole signed vs unsigned issue for atomic_t. There has been enough confusion on this topic to warrant a few explicit words I feel. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Will Deacon Acked-by: Boqun Feng Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney

Documentation/locking/atomic: Finish the document...

2017-08-25T09:06:33+00:00

Julia reported that the document looked unfinished, and it is. I forgot to include the example cooked up by Paul here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170731174345.GL3730@linux.vnet.ibm.com and I added an explicit example showing how, while it is an ACQUIRE pattern, it really does provide an MB. Reported-by: Julia Cartwright Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Boqun Feng Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

Documentation/locking/atomic: Add documents for new atomic_t APIs

2017-08-10T10:29:00+00:00

Since we've vastly expanded the atomic_t interface in recent years the existing documentation is woefully out of date and people seem to get confused a bit. Start a new document to hopefully better explain the current state of affairs. The old atomic_ops.txt also covers bitmaps and a few more details so this is not a full replacement and we'll therefore keep that document around until such a time that we've managed to write more text to cover its entire. Also please, ReST people, go away. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Boqun Feng Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paul McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Randy Dunlap Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar