lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4] locking: Introduce smp_cond_acquire()
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 06:40:04AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[snip]
>
> I cannot resist suggesting that any lock that interacts with
> spin_unlock_wait() must have all relevant acquisitions followed by
> smp_mb__after_unlock_lock().
>

But

1. This would expand the purpose of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(),
right? smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() is for making UNLOCK-LOCK
pair global transitive rather than guaranteeing no operations
can be reorder before the STORE part of LOCK/ACQUIRE.

2. If ARM64 has the same problem as PPC now,
smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() can't help, as it's a no-op on
ARM64.

Regards,
Boqun
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-12 16:21    [W:0.134 / U:0.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site