[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151203132938.GB3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:29:38 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, corbet@....net, mhocko@...nel.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
will.deacon@....com, waiman.long@....com, pjt@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched: Document Program-Order guarantees
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 09:16:48PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 01:40:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> [snip]
> > + *
> > + * CPU0 (schedule) CPU1 (try_to_wake_up) CPU2 (schedule)
> > + *
> > + * LOCK rq(0)->lock LOCK X->pi_lock
> > + * dequeue X
> > + * sched-out X
> > + * smp_store_release(X->on_cpu, 0);
> > + *
> > + * smp_cond_acquire(!X->on_cpu);
> > + * X->state = WAKING
> > + * set_task_cpu(X,2)
> > + *
> > + * LOCK rq(2)->lock
> > + * enqueue X
> > + * X->state = RUNNING
> > + * UNLOCK rq(2)->lock
> > + *
> > + * LOCK rq(2)->lock // orders against CPU1
> > + * sched-out Z
> > + * sched-in X
> > + * UNLOCK rq(1)->lock
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> This is a typo, right? Should be "UNLOCK rq(2)->lock".
Duh, yes. Fixed.
Thanks.
--
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