lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] membarrier: Propagate SYNC_CORE and RSEQ actions more carefully
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 10:09:22AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > smp_call_function_single(.wait=1) already orders against completion of
> > the IPI. Do we really need more?
>
> What kind of order does it provide? A quick skim of the code suggests
> that it's an acquire barrier, but I think we need a full sequential
> consistency barrier, at least on sufficiently weakly ordered
> architectures. On x86, loads are ordered and this is probably
> irrelevant. Also, this barrier was already there (it's the one I
> deleted below), and I think that removing it should be its own patch
> if we want to go that route.

smp_mb()
raise-IPI ---->
<IPI>
/* do crud */
STORE-RELEASE csd->lock, 0;
</IPI/

LOAD-ACQUIRE csd->lock


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-01 20:00    [W:0.116 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site