[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121121134747.261c426a@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:47:47 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Ivo Sieben <meltedpianoman@...il.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [REPOST-v2] sched: Prevent wakeup to enter critical section
needlessly
> But we try to understand your fault scenario: How can the LOAD leak
> into the critical section? As far as we understand the spin_unlock()
> function also contains a memory barrier to prevent such a reordering
> from happening.
It does - it would be very interesting for someone to look at the assembly
if this is making a difference.
Alan
--
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