[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1289645321.2743.21.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 11:48:41 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] x86/ticketlock: make __ticket_spin_trylock common
Le samedi 13 novembre 2010 à 18:17 +0800, Américo Wang a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:59:47AM -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> >+ union {
> >+ struct __raw_tickets tickets;
> >+ __ticketpair_t slock;
> >+ } tmp, new;
> >+ int ret;
> >+
> >+ tmp.tickets = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
> >+ if (tmp.tickets.head != tmp.tickets.tail)
> >+ return 0;
> >+
> >+ new.slock = tmp.slock + (1 << TICKET_SHIFT);
> >+
> >+ ret = cmpxchg(&lock->ticketpair, tmp.slock, new.slock) == tmp.slock;
> >+ barrier(); /* just make nothing creeps before lock is claimed */
>
> This one should be smp_wmb(), right? No CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE protected.
cmpxchg() is a full memory barrier, no need for smp_wmb() or barrier()
--
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