lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] locking: Implement an algorithm choice for Wound-Wait mutexes
[...]

> >>+ /*
> >>+ * wake_up_process() paired with set_current_state() inserts
> >>+ * sufficient barriers to make sure @owner either sees it's
> >>+ * wounded or has a wakeup pending to re-read the wounded
> >>+ * state.
> >IIUC, "sufficient barriers" = full memory barriers (here). (You may
> >want to be more specific.)
>
> Thanks for reviewing!
> OK. What about if someone relaxes that in the future?

This is actually one of my main concerns ;-) as, IIUC, those barriers are
not only sufficient but also necessary: anything "less than a full barrier"
(in either wake_up_process() or set_current_state()) would _not_ guarantee
the "condition" above unless I'm misunderstanding it.

But am I misunderstanding it? Which barriers/guarantee do you _need_ from
the above mentioned pairing? (hence my comment...)

Andrea

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-14 13:51    [W:0.046 / U:7.168 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site