[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <10660.1509641151@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2017 16:45:51 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Pass mode to wait_on_atomic_t() action funcs and provide default actions
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > The moment atomic_dec_and_test() is called, *net is at liberty to disappear,
> > so there's no way to find a waitqueue - unless that waitqueue is guaranteed
> > not to be deallocated, eg. by being global.
>
> But any possible wait side will still need to dereference *net at an
> indeterminate point in the future to ascertain the value does now indeed
> read 0.
Yeah, the assumption is that the *wait* side is where the deallocation is
happening. So I have something like:
net->live = false; // Tell the cell managers to delete the cells
...
foreach (cell)
queue_work(cell);
...
wait_on_atomic_t(&net->cells_outstanding, atomic_t_wait,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
...
destroy(net);
> ... We can certainly start with your patch, as that does clean things up.
Can I put that down as a Grudgingly-acked-by?
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists