[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1503191115030.26866@gentwo.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:16:13 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>
cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] mm/slub: fix lockups on PREEMPT && !SMP kernels
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > I was under the impression that this_cpu operations would always result
> > in an access, much like the *_ONCE accessors, so we should aways redo
> > the access for this_cpu_read(s->cpu_slab->tid). Is that not the case?
>
> I'm not the expert on that operation. Christoph could answer it.
this_cpu_read() always generates a load via an asm instruction.
--
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