[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181204235907.GA5388@andrea>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 00:59:07 +0100
From: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
To: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@...e.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] epoll: use rwlock in order to reduce
ep_poll_callback() contention
Hi Roman,
On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 12:50:58PM +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote:
> On 2018-12-03 18:34, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > This also ends up making the memory ordering of "xchg()" very very
> > important. Yes, we've documented it as being an ordering op, but I'm
> > not sure we've relied on it this directly before.
>
> Seems exit_mm() does exactly the same, the following chunk:
>
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> self.task = current;
> self.next = xchg(&core_state->dumper.next, &self);
>
>
> At least code pattern looks similar.
Maybe add a comment on top of (your) xchg() to note/justify these memory
ordering requirements? As Paul said: "if there are races, this would
help force them to happen" (and simplify the review, this/future).
Andrea
Powered by blists - more mailing lists