lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] seqlock: serialize against writers

The subject forgot to add "RT" in the brackets.

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > I could just force all of the seqbegins to hit the slowpath by hacking
> > the code and see what happens (aside from slowing down, of course ;)
>
> Only if you don't believe it will really crash? I think it's pretty
> clear even without trying it.
>
> > Question: Which seqlock_t does userspace use? I assume it uses
> > seqlock_t and not raw_seqlock_t.
>
> > But the only reason that I ask is that
> > I converted raw_seqlock_t to use the new style as well to be consistent,
>
> There's no raw_seqlock_t anywhere in mainline?

Nope, raw_seqlock_t in -rt is equivelant to seqlock_t in mainline.

>
> Anyways the variable is declared (in mainline) in asm-x86/vgtod.h
>
> > even though it is not strictly necessary for the same reasons. So if
> > perchance userspace uses the raw variant, I could solve this issue by
> > only re-working the seqlock_t variant. Kind of a long shot, but figured
> > I would mention it :)
>
> I guess you could define a new seqlock_t which is explicitely user space
> safe. That might avoid such issues in the future. But then
> that would likely require some code duplication and be ugly.
>
> On the other hand whatever problem you fixing in the kernel
> (to be honest it's still unclear to me what the problem is)
> needs to be likely fixed for the userland lock too.

I'm not convinced that the raw_seqlocks (mainline normal seqlocks) has a
problem anyway.

-- Steve



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-29 18:55    [W:0.058 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site