[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0808291256310.17917@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:58:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seqlock: serialize against writers
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
> Yeah, ideas crossed in the mail ;)
>
> I could just force all of the seqbegins to hit the slowpath by hacking
> the code and see what happens (aside from slowing down, of course ;)
>
> Question: Which seqlock_t does userspace use? I assume it uses
> seqlock_t and not raw_seqlock_t. But the only reason that I ask is that
> I converted raw_seqlock_t to use the new style as well to be consistent,
> even though it is not strictly necessary for the same reasons. So if
> perchance userspace uses the raw variant, I could solve this issue by
> only re-working the seqlock_t variant. Kind of a long shot, but figured
> I would mention it :)
I answered this on IRC, but this is for the rest of those reading this
thread.
Userspace (vsyscalls) can only use raw_seqlock_t. And only the read
version for that matter. Since the read of raw_seqlock_t is just that, a
read, no writes, and no jumping to other functions on contention.
The vsyscalls should never use the -rt seqlock_t. Not modifying the raws
here should make us golden.
-- Steve
--
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