[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171207030059.29771-1-palmer@sifive.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:00:59 -0800
From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] RISC-V: Resurrect smp_mb__after_spinlock()
I removed this last week because of an incorrect comment:
smp_mb__after_spinlock() is actually still used, and is necessary on
RISC-V. It's been resurrected, with a comment that describes what it
actually does this time. Thanks to Andrea for finding the bug!
Fixes: 3343eb6806f3 ("RISC-V: Remove smb_mb__{before,after}_spinlock()")
CC: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
index 773c4e039cd7..c0319cbf1eec 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -38,6 +38,25 @@
#define smp_rmb() RISCV_FENCE(r,r)
#define smp_wmb() RISCV_FENCE(w,w)
+/*
+ * This is a very specific barrier: it's currently only used in two places in
+ * the kernel, both in the scheduler. See include/linux/spinlock.h for the two
+ * orderings it guarantees, but the "critical section is RCsc" guarantee
+ * mandates a barrier on RISC-V. The sequence looks like:
+ *
+ * lr.aq lock
+ * sc lock <= LOCKED
+ * smp_mb__after_spinlock()
+ * // critical section
+ * lr lock
+ * sc.rl lock <= UNLOCKED
+ *
+ * The AQ/RL pair provides a RCpc critical section, but there's not really any
+ * way we can take advantage of that here because the ordering is only enforced
+ * on that one lock. Thus, we're just doing a full fence.
+ */
+#define smp_mb__after_spinlock() RISCV_FENCE(rw,rw)
+
#include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
--
2.13.6
Powered by blists - more mailing lists