[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150301132829.GB20691@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 14:28:29 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 1vier1@....de,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...allels.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: Update/correct memory barriers.
On 02/28, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> The idea is that this would become a no-op on x86, s390, sparc &c, an isb
> instruction on ARM, an isync instruction on Power, and I cannot remember
> what on Itanium? The other idea being to provide read-to-read control
> ordering in addition to the current read-to-write control ordering?
To me, the only purpose is documentation. Let's look at task_work_run()
/*
* Synchronize with task_work_cancel(). It can't remove
* the first entry == work, cmpxchg(task_works) should
* fail, but it can play with *work and other entries.
*/
raw_spin_unlock_wait(&task->pi_lock);
smp_mb();
It doesn't need the full mb() too. But rmb() will look very confusing
without a fat comment. So I think that it would be nice to write this
comment once and put it into the new helper.
Oleg.
--
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