lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Subjectfrlock and barrier discussion
From
Date
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 23:06, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 03:42:21PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > +static inline void fr_write_begin(frlock_t *rw)
> > +{
> > + preempt_disable();
> > + rw->pre_sequence++;
> > + wmb();
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void fr_write_end(frlock_t *rw)
> > +{
> > + wmb();
> > + rw->post_sequence++;
>
> These need to be mb(), not wmb(), if you want the bits in between
> to actually happen in between, as with your xtime example. At
> present there's nothing stoping xtime from being *read* before
> your read from pre_sequence happens.


First, write_begin/end can only be safely used when there is separate
writer synchronization such as a spin_lock or semaphore.
As far as I know, semaphore or spin_lock guarantees a barrier.
So xtime or anything else can not be read before the spin_lock.

Using mb() is more paranoid than necessary.




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.065 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site