[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20071017184512.a1c647b2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:45:12 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] synchronize_irq needs a barrier
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:25:42 +1000
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> synchronize_irq needs at the very least a compiler barrier and a
> read barrier on SMP,
Why?
> but there are enough cases around where a
> write barrier is also needed and it's not a hot path so I prefer
> using a full smp_mb() here.
>
> It will degrade to a compiler barrier on !SMP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
> ---
>
> Index: linux-work/kernel/irq/manage.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-work.orig/kernel/irq/manage.c 2007-10-18 11:22:16.000000000 +1000
> +++ linux-work/kernel/irq/manage.c 2007-10-18 11:22:20.000000000 +1000
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ void synchronize_irq(unsigned int irq)
> if (irq >= NR_IRQS)
> return;
>
> + smp_mb();
> while (desc->status & IRQ_INPROGRESS)
> cpu_relax();
> }
Anyone reading this code is going to ask "wtf is that for". It needs a
comment telling them.
mb() is the new lock_kernel(). Sigh.
-
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