[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160531094134.606249808@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 11:41:34 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
manfred@...orfullife.com, dave@...olabs.net,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, will.deacon@....com
Cc: boqun.feng@...il.com, Waiman.Long@....com, tj@...nel.org,
pablo@...filter.org, kaber@...sh.net, davem@...emloft.net,
oleg@...hat.com, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
sasha.levin@...cle.com, hofrat@...dl.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: [PATCH -v3 0/8] spin_unlock_wait borkage and assorted bits
Similar to -v2 in that it rewrites spin_unlock_wait() for all.
The new spin_unlock_wait() provides ACQUIRE semantics to match the RELEASE of
the spin_unlock() we waited for and thereby ensure we can fully observe its
critical section.
This fixes a number (pretty much all) spin_unlock_wait() users.
This series pulls in the smp_cond_acquire() rewrite because it introduces a lot
of new users of it. All simple spin_unlock_wait() implementations end up being
one.
New in this series; apart from the fixes from the last posting (s390,tile),
is that it moves smp_cond_load_acquire() and friends into asm-generic/barrier.h
such that architectures that explicitly do not do load speculation (tile)
can override smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep().
I'm planning on queuing these patches for 4.8.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists