[OT] ppc64 serialization problem
Greg Smith
gsmith at nc.rr.com
Thu Mar 30 05:20:33 EST 2006
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 15:07 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Greg Smith writes:
>
> > On rare occasions, values A and B will differ! In the examples that I
> > have seen, there is contention with `lock'. This phenomenon does not
> > occur on ppc32 or a number of other architectures that we support.
>
> I would be interested to see the assembler code being generated for
> your code snippets.
>
> Paul.
This is looking like a compiler optimization issue. We have two fields
_u32 x,y;
Field y is what we are trying to serialize with the lock. However,
while we are doing that it appears another thread is updating x. When x
is updated and with optimization, the code is doing an 8 byte load of x
and y then doing an 8 byte store, wiping out what was stored in y.
Which explains why changing the type to _u64 seemed to fix the problem.
Below are some of the notes the other developer sent me.
Thanks,
Greg Smith
There are OTHER field neighbouring the ints_state field.. (and this is
probably some of the flags)..
gcc, when optimizing, gcc load and stores 64 bit values, *INCLUDING* the
ints_state field effectivelly breaking serialization.
Here is a sample program :
struct _test1
{
unsigned long long z;
unsigned char c;
unsigned int a:1;
const volatile unsigned int b;
};
int main()
{
}
unsigned int toto(struct _test1 *data)
{
data->a=1;
return data->b;
}
And here is the relevant asm snippet :
.A
ld 11,8(9) - get 64 bits ->a
lis 0,0x80 *
sldi 0,0,32 *
or 0,11,0 *
.B
std 0,8(9) * Store 64 bits -> a
ld 9,112(31) *
lwz 0,12(9) * get 32 bit b
So it is clear between .A and .B -> value of b was read then written. If
anything happens between .A and .B to ->b, then it is lost.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list