lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS
On 04/17/2014 11:58 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +static __always_inline void
>> +clear_pending_set_locked(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>> +{
>> + struct __qspinlock *l = (void *)lock;
>> +
>> + ACCESS_ONCE(l->locked_pending) = 1;
>> +}
>> @@ -157,8 +251,13 @@ static inline int trylock_pending(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 *pval)
>> * we're pending, wait for the owner to go away.
>> *
>> * *,1,1 -> *,1,0
>> + *
>> + * this wait loop must be a load-acquire such that we match the
>> + * store-release that clears the locked bit and create lock
>> + * sequentiality; this because not all try_clear_pending_set_locked()
>> + * implementations imply full barriers.
> You renamed the function referred in the above comment.
>

Sorry, will fix the comments.

-Longman



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-18 00:41    [W:0.141 / U:0.552 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site