Re: [RFC PATCH-tip v2 1/6] locking/osq: Make lock/unlock proper acquire/release barrier
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: 2016-06-15 18:27:43
Also in:
linux-alpha, linux-s390, lkml
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: 2016-06-15 18:27:43
Also in:
linux-alpha, linux-s390, lkml
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
In any case, its fairly simple to cure, just add smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() at the end. If we bail because need_resched() we don't need the acquire I think.
I was just considering this for your smp_cond_acquire/smp_cond_load_acquire rework, so yeah I guess an smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep would be a nice compromise. However, I was always under the impression that races with node->locked were rather harmless (as indicated in the mentioned commit) -- which is why ->locked are simple load/stores, with the exception of the unqueueing -- but yeah, that's not even paired. Thanks, Davidlohr