Memory Ordering in Modern Microprocessors, Part II

Anybody who says computers give only right answers hasn't seen what happens when several SMP processors, each with its own cache, try to get at the same data. Here's how to keep the kernel's view of memory correct, no matter what architecture you're on.
SPARC RMO, PSO and TSO

Solaris on SPARC uses total-store order (TSO); however, Linux runs SPARC in relaxed-memory order (RMO) mode. The SPARC architecture also offers an intermediate partial-store order (PSO). Any program that runs in RMO also can run in either PSO or TSO. Similarly, a program that runs in PSO also can run in TSO. Moving a shared-memory parallel program in the other direction may require careful insertion of memory barriers; although, as noted earlier, programs that make standard use of synchronization primitives need not worry about memory barriers.

SPARC has a flexible memory-barrier instruction that permits fine-grained control of ordering:

  • StoreStore: order preceding stores before subsequent stores. This option is used by the Linux smp_wmb() primitive.

  • LoadStore: order preceding loads before subsequent stores.

  • StoreLoad: order preceding stores before subsequent loads.

  • LoadLoad: order preceding loads before subsequent loads. This option is used by the Linux smp_rmb() primitive.

  • Sync: fully complete all preceding operations before starting any subsequent operations.

  • MemIssue: complete preceding memory operations before subsequent memory operations, which is important for some instances of memory-mapped I/O.

  • Lookaside: same as MemIssue but applies only to preceding stores and subsequent loads, and even then only for stores and loads that access the same memory location.

The Linux smp_mb() primitive uses the first four options together, as in:

membar #LoadLoad | #LoadStore | #StoreStore | #StoreLoad

This fully orders memory operations.

So, why is membar #MemIssue needed? Because a membar #StoreLoad could permit a subsequent load to get its value from a write buffer, which would be disastrous if the write goes to an MMIO register that induces side effects on the value to be read. In contrast, membar #MemIssue would wait until the write buffers were flushed before permitting the loads to execute, thereby ensuring that the load actually gets its value from the MMIO register. Drivers instead could use membar #Sync, but the lighter-weight membar #MemIssue is preferred in cases where the additional function of the more-expensive membar #Sync are not required.

The membar #Lookaside is a lighter-weight version of membar #MemIssue, which is useful when writing to a given MMIO register that affects the value read next from that same register. However, the heavier-weight membar #MemIssue must be used when a write to a given MMIO register affects the value read next from some other MMIO register.

It is not clear why SPARC does not define wmb() to be membar #MemIssue and smb_wmb() to be membar #StoreStore, as the current definitions seem vulnerable to bugs in some drivers. It is quite possible that all the SPARC CPUs that Linux runs on implement a more conservative memory-ordering model than the architecture would permit.

SPARC requires a flush instruction be used between the time that an instruction is stored and executed. This is needed to flush any prior value for that location from the SPARC's instruction cache. Notice that flush takes an address and flushes only that address from the instruction cache. On SMP systems, all CPUs' caches are flushed, but there is no convenient way to determine when the off-CPU flushes complete, although there is a reference to an implementation note.

x86

The x86 CPUs provide process ordering so that all CPUs agree on the order of a given CPU's writes to memory, so the smp_wmb() primitive is a no-op for the CPU. However, a compiler directive is required to prevent the compiler from performing optimizations that would result in reordering across the smp_wmb() primitive.

On the other hand, x86 CPUs give no ordering guarantees for loads, so the smp_mb() and smp_rmb() primitives expand to lock;addl. This atomic instruction acts as a barrier to both loads and stores. Some SSE instructions are ordered weakly; for example, clflush and nontemporal move instructions. CPUs that have SSE can use mfence for smp_mb(), lfence for smp_rmb() and sfence for smp_wmb(). A few versions of the x86 CPU have a mode bit that enables out-of-order stores, and for these CPUs, smp_wmb() also must be defined to be lock;addl.

Although many older x86 implementations accommodated self-modifying code without the need for any special instructions, newer revisions of the x86 architecture no longer require x86 CPUs to be so accommodating. Interestingly enough, this relaxation comes just in time to inconvenience JIT implementors.

______________________

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

memory addressing question

raz ben yehuda's picture

First...Loved your article.

I hope I am not bothering you. But I have a question regarding
memory addressing in Linux.

As I have read ( Mel Gorman's book ) a virtual address in kernel space bellow the first 896 MB is simply an offset PAGE_OFFSET which is stored in the DS register.
So when the cpu wishes to aproach it he substracts this value from the address when he is in kernel mode.

Well if he does, how can the processor tell between a vmalloc virtual
address ( 896 to 1GB) in kernel space to a virtual address in kernel
space ( bellow the 896 MB) ?

Furthermore , If I boot my linux ( An Intel machine, T42 IBM laptop ) using only part of the memory ( boot mem=400M out of 512M) , I would not be able to address addresses above 400 MB .

I tried to memcpy to address above 400 MB and I crashed.
So i realy have no idea where i am wrong.

I would most appreciate your kind help.

Thank you.

Raz

PS.

I am looking for some information/articles regarding how dows the CPU actually approaches the memory.

Webinar
One Click, Universal Protection: Implementing Centralized Security Policies on Linux Systems

As Linux continues to play an ever increasing role in corporate data centers and institutions, ensuring the integrity and protection of these systems must be a priority. With 60% of the world's websites and an increasing share of organization's mission-critical workloads running on Linux, failing to stop malware and other advanced threats on Linux can increasingly impact an organization's reputation and bottom line.

Learn More

Sponsored by Bit9

Webinar
Linux Backup and Recovery Webinar

Most companies incorporate backup procedures for critical data, which can be restored quickly if a loss occurs. However, fewer companies are prepared for catastrophic system failures, in which they lose all data, the entire operating system, applications, settings, patches and more, reducing their system(s) to “bare metal.” After all, before data can be restored to a system, there must be a system to restore it to.

In this one hour webinar, learn how to enhance your existing backup strategies for better disaster recovery preparedness using Storix System Backup Administrator (SBAdmin), a highly flexible bare-metal recovery solution for UNIX and Linux systems.

Learn More

Sponsored by Storix