[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1472742257-10515-3-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:04:12 +0200
From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, will.deacon@....com,
1vier1@....de, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/7] spinlock: Document memory barrier rules for spin_lock and spin_unlock().
In theory, the memory ordering rules for spinlock() and spin_unlock()
are simple: spin_lock is ACQUIRE, spin_unlock is RELEASE.
What is missing is a clear documentation for the corner cases:
- What is covered by the ACQUIRE during spin_lock: only the lock load
or also the lock store?
- spin_unlock_wait() is spin_lock()+spin_unlock().
- No memory ordering is enforced by spin_is_locked().
The patch adds this into Documentation/locking/spinlock.txt.
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
---
Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt b/Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt
index ff35e40..653b2fa 100644
--- a/Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt
+++ b/Documentation/locking/spinlocks.txt
@@ -40,6 +40,15 @@ example, internal driver data structures that nobody else ever touches).
touches a shared variable has to agree about the spinlock they want
to use.
+ NOTE! Code that needs stricter memory barriers than ACQUIRE during
+ LOCK and RELEASE during UNLOCK must use appropriate memory barriers
+ such as smp_mb__before_spinlock(). Especially, the ACQUIRE during
+ LOCK applies to reading the lock state. Operations within the
+ guarded area can happen before the lock store.
+ spin_unlock_wait() behaves like spin_lock();spin_unlock().
+ spin_is_locked() should not be used to build synchronization
+ primitives, no memory ordering is guaranteed.
+
----
Lesson 2: reader-writer spinlocks.
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists