Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 03 Feb 2011 09:49:13 -0800 | From | Frank Rowand <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq_lock() |
| |
On 02/03/11 09:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 16:21 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 01/04/11 06:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
< snip >
>>> @@ -2646,9 +2647,9 @@ void sched_fork(struct task_struct *p, i >>> * >>> * Silence PROVE_RCU. >>> */ >>> - rcu_read_lock(); >>> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags); >>> set_task_cpu(p, cpu); >>> - rcu_read_unlock(); >>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->pi_lock, flags); >> >> Does "* Silence PROVE_RCU." no longer apply after remove rcu_read_lock() and >> rcu_read_unlock()? > > I think the locking is still strictly superfluous, I can't seem to > recollect why I changed it from RCU to pi_lock, but since the task is > fresh and unhashed it really cannot be subject to concurrency.
Sorry, my comment was not very clear. I meant to ask: should the comment "* Silence PROVE_RCU." also be removed?
-Frank
| |