[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150612225000.GA24699@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 00:50:00 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mml@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] x86/mm: Enable and use the arch_pgd_init_late()
method
On 06/11, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> +void arch_pgd_init_late(struct mm_struct *mm, pgd_t *pgd)
> +{
> + /*
> + * This is called after a new MM has been made visible
> + * in fork() or exec().
> + *
> + * This barrier makes sure the MM is visible to new RCU
> + * walkers before we initialize it, so that we don't miss
> + * updates:
> + */
> + smp_wmb();
I can't understand the comment and the barrier...
Afaics, we need to ensure that:
> + if (pgd_val(*pgd_src))
> + WRITE_ONCE(*pgd_dst, *pgd_src);
either we notice the recent update of this PGD, or (say) the subsequent
sync_global_pgds() can miss the child.
How the write barrier can help?
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