[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170331133305.w5h5aibxydhxw7xy@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:33:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv2 1/8] printk: move printk_pending out of per-cpu
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 03:09:50PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Wed 2017-03-29 18:25:04, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > if (waitqueue_active(&log_wait)) {
> > - this_cpu_or(printk_pending, PRINTK_PENDING_WAKEUP);
> > + set_bit(PRINTK_PENDING_WAKEUP, &printk_pending);
>
> We should add here a write barrier:
>
> /*
> * irq_work_queue() uses cmpxchg() and implies the memory
> * barrier only when the work is queued. An explicit barrier
> * is needed here to make sure that wake_up_klogd_work_func()
> * sees printk_pending set even when the work was already queued
> * because of an other pending event.
> */
> smp_wmb();
>
> > irq_work_queue(this_cpu_ptr(&wake_up_klogd_work));
> > }
> > preempt_enable();
smp_mb__after_atomic() is probably better, because if you're not
ordering with the cmpxchg, you're ordering against a load done by
cmpxchg to see it doesn't need to do anything.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists