Re: [PATCH] fix gettimeofday vs. update_gtod race

On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 16:25 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:

Nathan Lynch wrote:

quoted

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 19:18 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:

quoted

No?  I didn't find anything about mftb having synchronizing
behavior.  How should we ensure that temp_varp is assigned before
reading the timebase?

I sync an isync would be enough.

I see, thanks.

Actually, after checking Book 2 and discussing with some other folks
I'm not so sure -- isync "may complete before storage accesses
associated with instructions preceding the isync instruction have been
performed."

Of sure, I was thinking about isync preventing mftb from being executed
and we can have a proper data dependency. Anyway, that's not necessary,
I've looked at the code and we no longer need to pass the tb value in
(it's historical). Thus we can just move the mftb in the protected area
and maybe with a twi/isync pair make sure we got the gtod pointer before
we do the mftb

Ben.