[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190701092429.GA10975@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:24:30 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jolsa@...hat.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, namhyung@...nel.org,
xiexiuqi@...wei.com,
syzbot+a24c397a29ad22d86c98@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix race between close() and fork()
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:46:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 05:50:03PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > + * Wake any perf_event_free_task() waiting for this event to be
> > > + * freed.
> > > + */
> > > + smp_mb(); /* pairs with wait_var_event() */
> > > + wake_up_var(var);
> >
> > Huh, so wake_up_var() doesn't imply a RELEASE?
> >
> > As an aside, doesn't that mean all callers of wake_up_var() have to do
> > likewise to ensure it isn't re-ordered with whatever prior stuff they're
> > trying to notify waiters about? Several do an smp_store_release() then a
> > wake_up_var(), but IIUC the wake_up_var() could get pulled before that
> > release...
>
> Yah,...
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190624165012.GH3436@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
That gets me a 404, so I'll assume that's a speculative store. ;)
> I needs to get back to that.
Ouch; sorry for reminding you of this mess!
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists