Thread (48 messages) flat view 48 messages, 8 authors, 2007-10-23

Re: [PATCH] synchronize_irq needs a barrier

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: 2007-10-18 02:57:37
Also in: lkml

In general, I tend to think that for this function to make any sense
(that is, to synchronize anything at all), it needs a barrier or you are
just making a decision based on a totally random value of desc->status
since it can have been re-ordered, speculatively loaded, pre-fetched,
whatever'ed... :-).
Take a real life example:

drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c

	/* Disable interrupts! */
	CHIPREG_WRITE32(&ioc->chip->IntMask, 0xFFFFFFFF);

	ioc->active = 0;
	synchronize_irq(pdev->irq);

And we aren't in a spinlock here. 

That's just a random example grepped.... I think I see a few more. Then,
some drivers like tg3 actually do an smp_mb() before calling
synchronize_irq(). But then, some don't.

I think trying to have all drivers be correct here is asking for
trouble, we'd rather have synchronize_irq() be uber-safe. It's not like
it was used in hot path anyway.

Ben.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help