Re: [RFC PATCH-tip v2 1/6] locking/osq: Make lock/unlock proper acquire/release barrier

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

 



On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Waiman Long wrote:

The osq_lock() and osq_unlock() function may not provide the necessary
acquire and release barrier in some cases. This patch makes sure
that the proper barriers are provided when osq_lock() is successful
or when osq_unlock() is called.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@xxxxxxx>
---
kernel/locking/osq_lock.c |    4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 05a3785..7dd4ee5 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
	 * cmpxchg in an attempt to undo our queueing.
	 */

-	while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
+	while (!smp_load_acquire(&node->locked)) {

Hmm this being a polling path, that barrier can get pretty expensive and
last I checked it was unnecessary:

036cc30c6b6 (locking/osq: No need for load/acquire when acquire-polling)

Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux