qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues


From: dann frazier
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu_futex_wait() lockups in ARM64: 2 possible issues
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:50:06 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 06:05:25AM +0000, Jan Glauber wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 11:15:04AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 09/10/19 10:02, Jan Glauber wrote:
> 
> > > I'm still not sure what the actual issue is here, but could it be some bad
> > > interaction between the notify_me and the list_lock? The are both 4 byte
> > > and side-by-side:
> > > 
> > > address notify_me: 0xaaaadb528aa0  sizeof notify_me: 4
> > > address list_lock: 0xaaaadb528aa4  sizeof list_lock: 4
> > > 
> > > AFAICS the generated code looks OK (all load/store exclusive done
> > > with 32 bit size):
> > > 
> > >      e6c:       885ffc01        ldaxr   w1, [x0]
> > >      e70:       11000821        add     w1, w1, #0x2
> > >      e74:       8802fc01        stlxr   w2, w1, [x0]
> > > 
> > > ...but if I bump notify_me size to uint64_t the issue goes away.
> > 
> > Ouch. :)  Is this with or without my patch(es)?
> > 
> > Also, what if you just add a dummy uint32_t after notify_me?
> 
> With the dummy the testcase also runs fine for 500 iterations.
> 
> Dann, can you try if this works on the Hi1620 too?

On Hi1620, it hung on the first iteration. Here's the complete patch
I'm running with:

diff --git a/include/block/aio.h b/include/block/aio.h
index 6b0d52f732..e6fd6f1a1a 100644
--- a/include/block/aio.h
+++ b/include/block/aio.h
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ struct AioContext {
      * Instead, the aio_poll calls include both the prepare and the
      * dispatch phase, hence a simple counter is enough for them.
      */
-    uint32_t notify_me;
+    uint64_t notify_me;
 
     /* A lock to protect between QEMUBH and AioHandler adders and deleter,
      * and to ensure that no callbacks are removed while we're walking and
diff --git a/util/async.c b/util/async.c
index ca83e32c7f..024c4c567d 100644
--- a/util/async.c
+++ b/util/async.c
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ aio_ctx_check(GSource *source)
     aio_notify_accept(ctx);
 
     for (bh = ctx->first_bh; bh; bh = bh->next) {
-        if (bh->scheduled) {
+        if (atomic_mb_read(&bh->scheduled)) {
             return true;
         }
     }
@@ -342,12 +342,12 @@ LinuxAioState *aio_get_linux_aio(AioContext *ctx)
 
 void aio_notify(AioContext *ctx)
 {
-    /* Write e.g. bh->scheduled before reading ctx->notify_me.  Pairs
-     * with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or atomic_add in aio_poll.
+    /* Using atomic_mb_read ensures that e.g. bh->scheduled is written before
+     * ctx->notify_me is read.  Pairs with atomic_or in aio_ctx_prepare or
+     * atomic_add in aio_poll.
      */
-    smp_mb();
-    if (ctx->notify_me) {
-        event_notifier_set(&ctx->notifier);
+    if (atomic_mb_read(&ctx->notify_me)) {
+       event_notifier_set(&ctx->notifier);
         atomic_mb_set(&ctx->notified, true);
     }
 }



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]