[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171005121250.prr5ff5kf3lxq6hx@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 14:12:50 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
oleg@...hat.com, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
Maged Michael <maged.michael@...il.com>, gromer@...gle.com,
Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] membarrier: Provide register expedited
private command
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 02:37:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..b0d79a5f5981
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/membarrier.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
> +void membarrier_arch_register_private_expedited(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *t;
> +
> + if (get_nr_threads(p) == 1) {
> + set_thread_flag(TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED);
> + return;
> + }
> + /*
> + * Coherence of TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED against thread
> + * fork is protected by siglock.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&p->sighand->siglock);
> + for_each_thread(p, t)
> + set_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(t),
> + TIF_MEMBARRIER_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED);
I'm not sure this works correctly vs CLONE_VM without CLONE_THREAD.
> + spin_unlock(&p->sighand->siglock);
> + /*
> + * Ensure all future scheduler executions will observe the new
> + * thread flag state for this process.
> + */
> + synchronize_sched();
This relies on the flag being read inside rq->lock, right?
> +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists