On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:49:00AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > void cpu_hotplug_done(void)
> > > {
> > > + /* Signal the writer is done */
> > > + cpuhp_writer = 0;
> > > + wake_up_all(&cpuhp_wq);
> > > +
> > > + /* Wait for any pending readers to be running */
> > > + cpuhp_writer_wait(!atomic_read(&cpuhp_waitcount));
> > > + cpuhp_writer_task = NULL;
> >
> > We also need to ensure that the next reader should see all changes
> > done by the writer, iow this lacks "realease" semantics.
>
> Good point -- I was expecting wake_up_all() to provide the release
> semantics, but code could be reordered into __wake_up()'s critical
> section, especially in the case where there was nothing to wake
> up, but where there were new readers starting concurrently with
> cpu_hotplug_done().
Doh, indeed. I missed this in Oleg's email, but yes I made that same
assumption about wake_up_all().
--
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>