[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c1bbbe94-dbdc-da14-e0c3-850c965d8b5d@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 11:44:12 -0400
From: Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
boqun.feng@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] padata: use smp_mb in padata_reorder to avoid orphaned
padata jobs
On 7/16/19 11:01 AM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 02:53:09PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
>>
>> P1(atomic_t *reorder_objects, spinlock_t *pd_lock, spinlock_t *reorder_lock)
>> {
>> int r1;
>>
>> spin_lock(reorder_lock);
>> atomic_inc(reorder_objects);
>> spin_unlock(reorder_lock);
>> //smp_mb();
>> r1 = spin_trylock(pd_lock);
>> }
>
> Yes we need a matching mb on the other side. However, we can
> get away with using smp_mb__after_atomic thanks to the atomic_inc
> above.
>
> Daniel, can you please respin the patch with the matching smp_mb?
Sure, Herbert, will do.
Thanks,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists