Message ID | 20200703100650.621212-15-cohuck@redhat.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | s390x update | expand |
On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 12:06:50 +0200 Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> > > The atomic_cmpxchg() loop is broken because we occasionally end up with > old and _old having different values (a legit compiler can generate code > that accessed *ind_addr again to pick up a value for _old instead of > using the value of old that was already fetched according to the > rules of the abstract machine). This means the underlying CS instruction > may use a different old (_old) than the one we intended to use if > atomic_cmpxchg() performed the xchg part. > [..] I believe this fix should be considered for stable -- much like the ccw counterpart. Regards, Halil
diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c index 142e52a8ffdd..736965c9287f 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c @@ -637,22 +637,24 @@ static AddressSpace *s390_pci_dma_iommu(PCIBus *bus, void *opaque, int devfn) static uint8_t set_ind_atomic(uint64_t ind_loc, uint8_t to_be_set) { - uint8_t ind_old, ind_new; + uint8_t expected, actual; hwaddr len = 1; - uint8_t *ind_addr; + /* avoid multiple fetches */ + uint8_t volatile *ind_addr; ind_addr = cpu_physical_memory_map(ind_loc, &len, true); if (!ind_addr) { s390_pci_generate_error_event(ERR_EVENT_AIRERR, 0, 0, 0, 0); return -1; } + actual = *ind_addr; do { - ind_old = *ind_addr; - ind_new = ind_old | to_be_set; - } while (atomic_cmpxchg(ind_addr, ind_old, ind_new) != ind_old); - cpu_physical_memory_unmap(ind_addr, len, 1, len); + expected = actual; + actual = atomic_cmpxchg(ind_addr, expected, expected | to_be_set); + } while (actual != expected); + cpu_physical_memory_unmap((void *)ind_addr, len, 1, len); - return ind_old; + return actual; } static void s390_msi_ctrl_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t data,