lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 11/18] sched: Add p->pi_lock to task_rq_lock()
On 02/03/11 09:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 16:21 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 01/04/11 06:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

< snip >

>>> @@ -2646,9 +2647,9 @@ void sched_fork(struct task_struct *p, i
>>> *
>>> * Silence PROVE_RCU.
>>> */
>>> - rcu_read_lock();
>>> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>>> set_task_cpu(p, cpu);
>>> - rcu_read_unlock();
>>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>>
>> Does "* Silence PROVE_RCU." no longer apply after remove rcu_read_lock() and
>> rcu_read_unlock()?
>
> I think the locking is still strictly superfluous, I can't seem to
> recollect why I changed it from RCU to pi_lock, but since the task is
> fresh and unhashed it really cannot be subject to concurrency.

Sorry, my comment was not very clear. I meant to ask: should the
comment "* Silence PROVE_RCU." also be removed?

-Frank


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-03 18:51    [W:0.091 / U:2.560 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site