[PATCH] arm64: kcsan: Fix kcsan test_barrier fail and panic

[Mark Rutland]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 02:10:06PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 08:17AM +0000, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > index fd7e8fbaeef1..18863c50e9ce 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@
> >  #define wmb()	do { kcsan_wmb(); __wmb(); } while (0)
> >  #endif
> >  
> > +#ifdef __dma_mb
> > +#define dma_mb()	do { kcsan_mb(); __dma_mb(); } while (0)
> > +#endif
> > +
> 
> So it looks like arm64 is the only arch that defines dma_mb(). By adding
> it to asm-generic, we'd almost be encouraging other architectures to add
> it, which I don't know we want.
> 
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt doesn't mention dma_mb() either - so
> perhaps dma_mb() doesn't belong in asm-generic/barrier.h, and you could
> only change arm64's definition of dma_mb() to add the kcsan_mb().
> 
> Preferences? Maybe arch64 maintainers have more background on why arm64
> is an anomaly here.

Looking around, there's a single user:

[mark at lakrids:~/src/linux]% git grep -w dma_mb 
arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h:#define dma_mb()       dmb(osh)
arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h:#define __iomb()            dma_mb()

[mark at lakrids:~/src/linux]% git grep -w __iomb 
arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h:#define __iomb()            dma_mb()
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c:    __iomb();

... and that was introduced in commit:

  a76a37777f2c936b ("iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Ensure queue is read after updating prod pointer")

... where it is used to ensure that prior (read and write) accesses to
memory by a CPU are ordered w.r.t. a subsequent MMIO write.

That seems like it could be a generic shape of problem (especially for
IOMMUs), even if arm64 is the only architecture with an implementation
today. From my PoV it would weem to make sense as a generic thing, and
should probably be added to Documentation/memory-barriers.txt.

Will, thoughts?

Thanks,
Mark.