UbiquitousOS
/
OpenCloudOS-Kernel
mirror of https://gitee.com/OpenCloudOS/OpenCloudOS-Kernel.git
11
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
OpenCloudOS-Kernel/arch/arm64/include/asm/futex.h

140 lines
3.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
/*
* Copyright (C) 2012 ARM Ltd.
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
* published by the Free Software Foundation.
*
* This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
* GNU General Public License for more details.
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
* along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
*/
#ifndef __ASM_FUTEX_H
#define __ASM_FUTEX_H
#ifdef __KERNEL__
#include <linux/futex.h>
#include <linux/uaccess.h>
#include <asm/errno.h>
#define __futex_atomic_op(insn, ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, oparg) \
asm volatile( \
arm64: atomics: fix use of acquire + release for full barrier semantics Linux requires a number of atomic operations to provide full barrier semantics, that is no memory accesses after the operation can be observed before any accesses up to and including the operation in program order. On arm64, these operations have been incorrectly implemented as follows: // A, B, C are independent memory locations <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldaxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load with acquire <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b <Access [C]> The assumption here being that two half barriers are equivalent to a full barrier, so the only permitted ordering would be A -> B -> C (where B is the atomic operation involving both a load and a store). Unfortunately, this is not the case by the letter of the architecture and, in fact, the accesses to A and C are permitted to pass their nearest half barrier resulting in orderings such as Bl -> A -> C -> Bs or Bl -> C -> A -> Bs (where Bl is the load-acquire on B and Bs is the store-release on B). This is a clear violation of the full barrier requirement. The simple way to fix this is to implement the same algorithm as ARMv7 using explicit barriers: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) dmb ish // Full barrier 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> but this has the undesirable effect of introducing *two* full barrier instructions. A better approach is actually the following, non-intuitive sequence: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> The simple observations here are: - The dmb ensures that no subsequent accesses (e.g. the access to C) can enter or pass the atomic sequence. - The dmb also ensures that no prior accesses (e.g. the access to A) can pass the atomic sequence. - Therefore, no prior access can pass a subsequent access, or vice-versa (i.e. A is strictly ordered before C). - The stlxr ensures that no prior access can pass the store component of the atomic operation. The only tricky part remaining is the ordering between the ldxr and the access to A, since the absence of the first dmb means that we're now permitting re-ordering between the ldxr and any prior accesses. From an (arbitrary) observer's point of view, there are two scenarios: 1. We have observed the ldxr. This means that if we perform a store to [B], the ldxr will still return older data. If we can observe the ldxr, then we can potentially observe the permitted re-ordering with the access to A, which is clearly an issue when compared to the dmb variant of the code. Thankfully, the exclusive monitor will save us here since it will be cleared as a result of the store and the ldxr will retry. Notice that any use of a later memory observation to imply observation of the ldxr will also imply observation of the access to A, since the stlxr/dmb ensure strict ordering. 2. We have not observed the ldxr. This means we can perform a store and influence the later ldxr. However, that doesn't actually tell us anything about the access to [A], so we've not lost anything here either when compared to the dmb variant. This patch implements this solution for our barriered atomic operations, ensuring that we satisfy the full barrier requirements where they are needed. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:12 +08:00
"1: ldxr %w1, %2\n" \
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
insn "\n" \
"2: stlxr %w3, %w0, %2\n" \
" cbnz %w3, 1b\n" \
arm64: atomics: fix use of acquire + release for full barrier semantics Linux requires a number of atomic operations to provide full barrier semantics, that is no memory accesses after the operation can be observed before any accesses up to and including the operation in program order. On arm64, these operations have been incorrectly implemented as follows: // A, B, C are independent memory locations <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldaxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load with acquire <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b <Access [C]> The assumption here being that two half barriers are equivalent to a full barrier, so the only permitted ordering would be A -> B -> C (where B is the atomic operation involving both a load and a store). Unfortunately, this is not the case by the letter of the architecture and, in fact, the accesses to A and C are permitted to pass their nearest half barrier resulting in orderings such as Bl -> A -> C -> Bs or Bl -> C -> A -> Bs (where Bl is the load-acquire on B and Bs is the store-release on B). This is a clear violation of the full barrier requirement. The simple way to fix this is to implement the same algorithm as ARMv7 using explicit barriers: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) dmb ish // Full barrier 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> but this has the undesirable effect of introducing *two* full barrier instructions. A better approach is actually the following, non-intuitive sequence: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> The simple observations here are: - The dmb ensures that no subsequent accesses (e.g. the access to C) can enter or pass the atomic sequence. - The dmb also ensures that no prior accesses (e.g. the access to A) can pass the atomic sequence. - Therefore, no prior access can pass a subsequent access, or vice-versa (i.e. A is strictly ordered before C). - The stlxr ensures that no prior access can pass the store component of the atomic operation. The only tricky part remaining is the ordering between the ldxr and the access to A, since the absence of the first dmb means that we're now permitting re-ordering between the ldxr and any prior accesses. From an (arbitrary) observer's point of view, there are two scenarios: 1. We have observed the ldxr. This means that if we perform a store to [B], the ldxr will still return older data. If we can observe the ldxr, then we can potentially observe the permitted re-ordering with the access to A, which is clearly an issue when compared to the dmb variant of the code. Thankfully, the exclusive monitor will save us here since it will be cleared as a result of the store and the ldxr will retry. Notice that any use of a later memory observation to imply observation of the ldxr will also imply observation of the access to A, since the stlxr/dmb ensure strict ordering. 2. We have not observed the ldxr. This means we can perform a store and influence the later ldxr. However, that doesn't actually tell us anything about the access to [A], so we've not lost anything here either when compared to the dmb variant. This patch implements this solution for our barriered atomic operations, ensuring that we satisfy the full barrier requirements where they are needed. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:12 +08:00
" dmb ish\n" \
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
"3:\n" \
" .pushsection .fixup,\"ax\"\n" \
arm64: futex: ensure .fixup entries are sufficiently aligned AArch64 instructions must be 4-byte aligned, so make sure this is true for the futex .fixup section. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2013-11-07 03:31:24 +08:00
" .align 2\n" \
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
"4: mov %w0, %w5\n" \
" b 3b\n" \
" .popsection\n" \
" .pushsection __ex_table,\"a\"\n" \
" .align 3\n" \
" .quad 1b, 4b, 2b, 4b\n" \
" .popsection\n" \
: "=&r" (ret), "=&r" (oldval), "+Q" (*uaddr), "=&r" (tmp) \
: "r" (oparg), "Ir" (-EFAULT) \
arm64: asm: remove redundant "cc" clobbers cbnz/tbnz don't update the condition flags, so remove the "cc" clobbers from inline asm blocks that only use these instructions to implement conditional branches. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:13 +08:00
: "memory")
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
static inline int
futex_atomic_op_inuser (int encoded_op, u32 __user *uaddr)
{
int op = (encoded_op >> 28) & 7;
int cmp = (encoded_op >> 24) & 15;
int oparg = (encoded_op << 8) >> 20;
int cmparg = (encoded_op << 20) >> 20;
int oldval = 0, ret, tmp;
if (encoded_op & (FUTEX_OP_OPARG_SHIFT << 28))
oparg = 1 << oparg;
if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, uaddr, sizeof(u32)))
return -EFAULT;
pagefault_disable(); /* implies preempt_disable() */
switch (op) {
case FUTEX_OP_SET:
__futex_atomic_op("mov %w0, %w4",
ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, oparg);
break;
case FUTEX_OP_ADD:
__futex_atomic_op("add %w0, %w1, %w4",
ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, oparg);
break;
case FUTEX_OP_OR:
__futex_atomic_op("orr %w0, %w1, %w4",
ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, oparg);
break;
case FUTEX_OP_ANDN:
__futex_atomic_op("and %w0, %w1, %w4",
ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, ~oparg);
break;
case FUTEX_OP_XOR:
__futex_atomic_op("eor %w0, %w1, %w4",
ret, oldval, uaddr, tmp, oparg);
break;
default:
ret = -ENOSYS;
}
pagefault_enable(); /* subsumes preempt_enable() */
if (!ret) {
switch (cmp) {
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_EQ: ret = (oldval == cmparg); break;
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_NE: ret = (oldval != cmparg); break;
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_LT: ret = (oldval < cmparg); break;
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_GE: ret = (oldval >= cmparg); break;
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_LE: ret = (oldval <= cmparg); break;
case FUTEX_OP_CMP_GT: ret = (oldval > cmparg); break;
default: ret = -ENOSYS;
}
}
return ret;
}
static inline int
futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic(u32 *uval, u32 __user *uaddr,
u32 oldval, u32 newval)
{
int ret = 0;
u32 val, tmp;
if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, uaddr, sizeof(u32)))
return -EFAULT;
asm volatile("// futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic\n"
arm64: atomics: fix use of acquire + release for full barrier semantics Linux requires a number of atomic operations to provide full barrier semantics, that is no memory accesses after the operation can be observed before any accesses up to and including the operation in program order. On arm64, these operations have been incorrectly implemented as follows: // A, B, C are independent memory locations <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldaxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load with acquire <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b <Access [C]> The assumption here being that two half barriers are equivalent to a full barrier, so the only permitted ordering would be A -> B -> C (where B is the atomic operation involving both a load and a store). Unfortunately, this is not the case by the letter of the architecture and, in fact, the accesses to A and C are permitted to pass their nearest half barrier resulting in orderings such as Bl -> A -> C -> Bs or Bl -> C -> A -> Bs (where Bl is the load-acquire on B and Bs is the store-release on B). This is a clear violation of the full barrier requirement. The simple way to fix this is to implement the same algorithm as ARMv7 using explicit barriers: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) dmb ish // Full barrier 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> but this has the undesirable effect of introducing *two* full barrier instructions. A better approach is actually the following, non-intuitive sequence: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> The simple observations here are: - The dmb ensures that no subsequent accesses (e.g. the access to C) can enter or pass the atomic sequence. - The dmb also ensures that no prior accesses (e.g. the access to A) can pass the atomic sequence. - Therefore, no prior access can pass a subsequent access, or vice-versa (i.e. A is strictly ordered before C). - The stlxr ensures that no prior access can pass the store component of the atomic operation. The only tricky part remaining is the ordering between the ldxr and the access to A, since the absence of the first dmb means that we're now permitting re-ordering between the ldxr and any prior accesses. From an (arbitrary) observer's point of view, there are two scenarios: 1. We have observed the ldxr. This means that if we perform a store to [B], the ldxr will still return older data. If we can observe the ldxr, then we can potentially observe the permitted re-ordering with the access to A, which is clearly an issue when compared to the dmb variant of the code. Thankfully, the exclusive monitor will save us here since it will be cleared as a result of the store and the ldxr will retry. Notice that any use of a later memory observation to imply observation of the ldxr will also imply observation of the access to A, since the stlxr/dmb ensure strict ordering. 2. We have not observed the ldxr. This means we can perform a store and influence the later ldxr. However, that doesn't actually tell us anything about the access to [A], so we've not lost anything here either when compared to the dmb variant. This patch implements this solution for our barriered atomic operations, ensuring that we satisfy the full barrier requirements where they are needed. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:12 +08:00
"1: ldxr %w1, %2\n"
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
" sub %w3, %w1, %w4\n"
" cbnz %w3, 3f\n"
"2: stlxr %w3, %w5, %2\n"
" cbnz %w3, 1b\n"
arm64: atomics: fix use of acquire + release for full barrier semantics Linux requires a number of atomic operations to provide full barrier semantics, that is no memory accesses after the operation can be observed before any accesses up to and including the operation in program order. On arm64, these operations have been incorrectly implemented as follows: // A, B, C are independent memory locations <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldaxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load with acquire <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b <Access [C]> The assumption here being that two half barriers are equivalent to a full barrier, so the only permitted ordering would be A -> B -> C (where B is the atomic operation involving both a load and a store). Unfortunately, this is not the case by the letter of the architecture and, in fact, the accesses to A and C are permitted to pass their nearest half barrier resulting in orderings such as Bl -> A -> C -> Bs or Bl -> C -> A -> Bs (where Bl is the load-acquire on B and Bs is the store-release on B). This is a clear violation of the full barrier requirement. The simple way to fix this is to implement the same algorithm as ARMv7 using explicit barriers: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) dmb ish // Full barrier 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> but this has the undesirable effect of introducing *two* full barrier instructions. A better approach is actually the following, non-intuitive sequence: <Access [A]> // atomic_op (B) 1: ldxr x0, [B] // Exclusive load <op(B)> stlxr w1, x0, [B] // Exclusive store with release cbnz w1, 1b dmb ish // Full barrier <Access [C]> The simple observations here are: - The dmb ensures that no subsequent accesses (e.g. the access to C) can enter or pass the atomic sequence. - The dmb also ensures that no prior accesses (e.g. the access to A) can pass the atomic sequence. - Therefore, no prior access can pass a subsequent access, or vice-versa (i.e. A is strictly ordered before C). - The stlxr ensures that no prior access can pass the store component of the atomic operation. The only tricky part remaining is the ordering between the ldxr and the access to A, since the absence of the first dmb means that we're now permitting re-ordering between the ldxr and any prior accesses. From an (arbitrary) observer's point of view, there are two scenarios: 1. We have observed the ldxr. This means that if we perform a store to [B], the ldxr will still return older data. If we can observe the ldxr, then we can potentially observe the permitted re-ordering with the access to A, which is clearly an issue when compared to the dmb variant of the code. Thankfully, the exclusive monitor will save us here since it will be cleared as a result of the store and the ldxr will retry. Notice that any use of a later memory observation to imply observation of the ldxr will also imply observation of the access to A, since the stlxr/dmb ensure strict ordering. 2. We have not observed the ldxr. This means we can perform a store and influence the later ldxr. However, that doesn't actually tell us anything about the access to [A], so we've not lost anything here either when compared to the dmb variant. This patch implements this solution for our barriered atomic operations, ensuring that we satisfy the full barrier requirements where they are needed. Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:12 +08:00
" dmb ish\n"
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
"3:\n"
" .pushsection .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
"4: mov %w0, %w6\n"
" b 3b\n"
" .popsection\n"
" .pushsection __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
" .align 3\n"
" .quad 1b, 4b, 2b, 4b\n"
" .popsection\n"
: "+r" (ret), "=&r" (val), "+Q" (*uaddr), "=&r" (tmp)
: "r" (oldval), "r" (newval), "Ir" (-EFAULT)
arm64: asm: remove redundant "cc" clobbers cbnz/tbnz don't update the condition flags, so remove the "cc" clobbers from inline asm blocks that only use these instructions to implement conditional branches. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
2014-02-04 20:29:13 +08:00
: "memory");
arm64: Atomic operations This patch introduces the atomic, mutex and futex operations. Many atomic operations use the load-acquire and store-release operations which imply barriers, avoiding the need for explicit DMB. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
2012-03-05 19:49:29 +08:00
*uval = val;
return ret;
}
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
#endif /* __ASM_FUTEX_H */