[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070316034123.9de92632.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 03:41:23 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Keir Fraser <keir@...source.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@...source.com>,
<virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch 21/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Use the hvc
console infrastructure for Xen console
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:31:49 +0000 Keir Fraser <keir@...source.com> wrote:
> On 16/3/07 09:58, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> >> These mb()'s are pretty standard for lock-free producer/consumer
> >> rings. Write descriptor /then/ write the updated producer. Read the
> >> producer /then/ read any descriptors revealed by this new producer
> >> value.
> >
> > then use rmb()/wmb(). Rarely does a ring protocol truly need mb().
>
> It's needed for writing data /after/ reading the consumer index that shows
> you have space to write. Looking through xenbus_comms.c I think all the
> barriers are correct except there is a spurious extra mb() in xb_read(),
> where there is a later rmb() which is sufficient by itself. All the others
> have a purpose.
>
If Ingo couldn't work this out from reading the code then nobody else can,
and we have a maintainability problem which can only be solved with
adequate commenting.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists