[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160408110232.GP3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:02:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Paul Turner <commonly@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] restartable sequences v2: fast user-space percpu
critical sections
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 03:05:26PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> It doesn't, which is what I like about my variant. If the thread
> accesses the protected data structure, though, it should bump the
> sequence count, which will cause the first thread to about when it
> gets scheduled in.
Nope it won't, because that first thread is right at the commit
instruction, nothing will stop it from executing that store and clobbing
what we just wrote.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists