[RFC please help] membarrier: Rewrite sync_core_before_usermode()
Peter Zijlstra
peterz at infradead.org
Tue Jan 5 11:37:31 EST 2021
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 08:20:51AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > Interestingly, the architecture recently added a control bit to remove
> > this synchronisation from exception return, so if we set that then we'd
> > have a problem with SYNC_CORE and adding an ISB would be necessary (and
> > we could probable then make kernel->kernel returns cheaper, but I
> > suspect we're relying on this implicit synchronisation in other places
> > too).
> >
>
> Is ISB just a context synchronization event or does it do more?
IIRC it just the instruction sync (like power ISYNC).
> On x86, it’s very hard to tell that MFENCE does any more than LOCK,
> but it’s much slower. And we have LFENCE, which, as documented,
> doesn’t appear to have any semantics at all. (Or at least it didn’t
> before Spectre.)
AFAIU MFENCE is a completion barrier, while LOCK prefix is not. A bit
like ARM's DSB vs DMB.
It is for this reason that mb() is still MFENCE, while our smp_mb() is a
LOCK prefixed NO-OP.
And yes, LFENCE used to be poorly defined and it was sometimes
understood to be a completion barrier relative to prior LOADs, while it
is now a completion barrier for any prior instruction, and really should
be renamed to IFENCE.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list