[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51e8202b163d7522efb18aa2ca79d952@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 12:25:39 +0100
From: Roman Penyaev <rpenyaev@...e.de>
To: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
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
On 2018-12-05 00:59, Andrea Parri wrote:
> 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).
Hi Andrea,
Sure, this path is tricky, so will I cook something up.
--
Roman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists