lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2] x86 spinlock: Fix memory corruption on completing completions
On 02/09, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>
> +static inline void __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> + arch_spinlock_t old, new;
> + __ticket_t diff;
> +
> + old.tickets = READ_ONCE(lock->tickets);
> + diff = (old.tickets.tail & ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG) - old.tickets.head;
> +
> + /* try to clear slowpath flag when there are no contenders */
> + if ((old.tickets.tail & TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG) &&
> + (diff == TICKET_LOCK_INC)) {
> + new = old;
> + new.tickets.tail &= ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG;
> + cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail, old.head_tail, new.head_tail);
> + }
> +}

Can't we simplify it? We own .head, and we already know it. We only need
to clear TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG in .tail atomically?

IOW,

static inline void __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(arch_spinlock_t *lock, __ticket_t head)
{
__ticket_t old_tail, new_tail;

new_tail = head + TICKET_LOCK_INC;
old_tail = new_tail | TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG;

if (READ_ONCE(lock->tickets.tail) == old_tail)
cmpxchg(&lock->tickets.tail, old_tail, new_tail);
}

Plus

- __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(lock);
+ __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(lock, inc.tail);

Or I missed something?

And I think it would be better to avoid ifdef(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS),
ww can just do

if (TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG)
__ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath();

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-02-09 16:21    [W:0.046 / U:0.992 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site