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

[Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> In any case, its fairly simple to cure, just add
> smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() at the end. If we bail because
> need_resched() we don't need the acquire I think.

I was just considering this for your smp_cond_acquire/smp_cond_load_acquire
rework, so yeah I guess an smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep would be a nice
compromise. 

However, I was always under the impression that races with node->locked were
rather harmless (as indicated in the mentioned commit) -- which is why ->locked
are simple load/stores, with the exception of the unqueueing -- but yeah, that's
not even paired.

Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html