[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090708221031.GD2945@jolsa.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 00:10:31 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fbl@...hat.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
htejun@...il.com, jarkao2@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
davidel@...ilserver.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: [PATCHv7 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock
Adding smp_mb__after_lock define to be used as a smp_mb call after
a lock.
Making it nop for x86, since {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are
full memory barriers.
wbr,
jirka
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h | 4 ++++
include/linux/spinlock.h | 5 +++++
include/net/sock.h | 5 ++++-
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
index b7e5db8..4e77853 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
@@ -302,4 +302,8 @@ static inline void __raw_write_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
#define _raw_read_relax(lock) cpu_relax()
#define _raw_write_relax(lock) cpu_relax()
+/* The {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are full memory barriers. */
+static inline void smp_mb__after_lock(void) { }
+#define ARCH_HAS_SMP_MB_AFTER_LOCK
+
#endif /* _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H */
diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
index 252b245..4be57ab 100644
--- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
+++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
@@ -132,6 +132,11 @@ do { \
#endif /*__raw_spin_is_contended*/
#endif
+/* The lock does not imply full memory barrier. */
+#ifndef ARCH_HAS_SMP_MB_AFTER_LOCK
+static inline void smp_mb__after_lock(void) { smp_mb(); }
+#endif
+
/**
* spin_unlock_wait - wait until the spinlock gets unlocked
* @lock: the spinlock in question.
diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
index 4eb8409..2c0da92 100644
--- a/include/net/sock.h
+++ b/include/net/sock.h
@@ -1271,6 +1271,9 @@ static inline int sk_has_allocations(const struct sock *sk)
* in its cache, and so does the tp->rcv_nxt update on CPU2 side. The CPU1
* could then endup calling schedule and sleep forever if there are no more
* data on the socket.
+ *
+ * The sk_has_sleeper is always called right after a call to read_lock, so we
+ * can use smp_mb__after_lock barrier.
*/
static inline int sk_has_sleeper(struct sock *sk)
{
@@ -1280,7 +1283,7 @@ static inline int sk_has_sleeper(struct sock *sk)
*
* This memory barrier is paired in the sock_poll_wait.
*/
- smp_mb();
+ smp_mb__after_lock();
return sk->sk_sleep && waitqueue_active(sk->sk_sleep);
}
--
1.6.2.5
--
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