ipc/sem.c: change memory barrier in sem_lock() to smp_rmb()

commit 2e094abfd1f29a08a60523b42d4508281b8dee0e upstream.

When I fixed bugs in the sem_lock() logic, I was more conservative than
necessary.  Therefore it is safe to replace the smp_mb() with smp_rmb().
And: With smp_rmb(), semop() syscalls are up to 10% faster.

The race we must protect against is:

	sem->lock is free
	sma->complex_count = 0
	sma->sem_perm.lock held by thread B

thread A:

A: spin_lock(&sem->lock)

			B: sma->complex_count++; (now 1)
			B: spin_unlock(&sma->sem_perm.lock);

A: spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock);
A: XXXXX memory barrier
A: if (sma->complex_count == 0)

Thread A must read the increased complex_count value, i.e. the read must
not be reordered with the read of sem_perm.lock done by spin_is_locked().

Since it's about ordering of reads, smp_rmb() is sufficient.

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: update sem_lock() comment, from Davidlohr]
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Acked-by: Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>

diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index db9d241af133d770cb0a95a22cacf257f79b1215..0c312ac04e4946128455ff3f164be60446b46966 100644 (file)
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -326,10 +326,17 @@ static inline int sem_lock(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
 
                /* Then check that the global lock is free */
                if (!spin_is_locked(&sma->sem_perm.lock)) {
-                       /* spin_is_locked() is not a memory barrier */
-                       smp_mb();
+                       /*
+                        * The ipc object lock check must be visible on all
+                        * cores before rechecking the complex count.  Otherwise
+                        * we can race with  another thread that does:
+                        *      complex_count++;
+                        *      spin_unlock(sem_perm.lock);
+                        */
+                       smp_rmb();
 
-                       /* Now repeat the test of complex_count:
+                       /*
+                        * Now repeat the test of complex_count:
                         * It can't change anymore until we drop sem->lock.
                         * Thus: if is now 0, then it will stay 0.
                         */