[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y87FLV0dWSyQz3NZ@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:34:37 -0500
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Hernan Ponce de Leon <hernan.poncedeleon@...weicloud.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org,
longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, akpm@...l.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, joel@...lfernandes.org,
diogo.behrens@...wei.com, jonas.oberhauser@...wei.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Hernan Ponce de Leon <hernanl.leon@...wei.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix data race in mark_rt_mutex_waiters
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 08:40:14AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> In the case, the value read is passed into cmpxchg_relaxed(), which
> checks the value against memory. In this case, as Arjan noted, the only
> compiler-and-silicon difference between data_race() and READ_ONCE()
> is that use of data_race() might allow the compiler to do things like
> tear the load, thus forcing the occasional spurious cmpxchg_relaxed()
> failure.
Is it possible in theory for a torn load to cause a spurious
cmpxchg_relaxed() success? Or would that not matter here?
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists