Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Jan 2006 18:51:37 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/21] mutex subsystem, -V14 |
| |
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Joel Schopp wrote: > > > > this is version 14 of the generic mutex subsystem, against v2.6.15. > > > > > > The patch-queue consists of 21 patches, which can also be downloaded from: > > > > > > http://redhat.com/~mingo/generic-mutex-subsystem/ > > > > > > > Took a glance at this on ppc64. Would it be useful if I contributed an arch > > specific version like arm has? We'll either need an arch specific version or > > have the generic changed. > > Don't change the generic version. You should provide a ppc specific > version if the generic ones don't look so good.
Well, if the generic one generates _buggy_ code on ppc64, that means that either the generic version is buggy, or one of the atomics that it uses is buggily implemented on ppc64.
And I think it's the generic mutex stuff that is buggy. It seems to assume memory barriers that aren't valid to assume.
A mutex is more than just updating the mutex count properly. You also have to have the proper memory barriers there to make sure that the things that the mutex _protects_ actually stay inside the mutex.
So while a ppc64-optimized mutex is probably a good idea per se, I think the generic mutex code had better be fixed first and regardless of any optimized version.
On x86/x86-64, the locked instructions automatically imply the proper memory barriers, but that was just lucky, I think.
Linus - 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/
| |