On Tue, 8 Mar 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote: > # set the bit > 80543b8e: ld_s r2,[r13,0] <--- (A) Finds PG_locked is set > 80543b90: or r3,r2,1 <--- (B) other core unlocks right here > 80543b94: st_s r3,[r13,0] <--- (C) sets PG_locked (overwrites unlock) Duh. Guess you need to take the spinlock also in the arch specific implementation of __bit_spin_unlock(). This is certainly not the only case in which we use the __ op to unlock. You need a true atomic op or you need to take the "spinlock" in all cases where you modify the bit. If you take the lock in __bit_spin_unlock then the race cannot happen. > Are you convinced now ! Yes, please fix your arch specific code. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>