lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Q: schedule() and implied barriers on arm64
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 07:40:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:19:48PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > ... and the 'normal' code will have a control hazard somewhere, followed
> > by the implicit ISB in exception return, so there's a barrier of sorts
> > there too.
>
> Which exception return?

The return to userspace after the interrupt/fault/system call that got us
into the kernel.

> > The problem is that people say "full barrier" without defining what it
> > really means, and we end up going round the houses on things like
> > transitivity (which ctrl + isb doesn't always give you).
>
> I pretty much meant smp_mb() here :-)

In which case, we don't provide the transitivity guarantees that you would
get from an smp_mb().

Will


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-28 12:01    [W:0.063 / U:1.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site