Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | From | Joonsoo Kim <> | Subject | [PATCH RESEND] ARM: sched: correct update_sched_clock() | Date | Wed, 6 Feb 2013 14:21:16 +0900 |
| |
If we want load epoch_cyc and epoch_ns atomically, we should update epoch_cyc_copy first of all. This notify reader that updating is in progress.
If we update epoch_cyc first like as current implementation, there is subtle error case. Look at the below example.
<Initial Condition> cyc = 9 ns = 900 cyc_copy = 9
== CASE 1 == <CPU A = reader> <CPU B = updater> write cyc = 10 read cyc = 10 read ns = 900 write ns = 1000 write cyc_copy = 10 read cyc_copy = 10
output = (10, 900)
== CASE 2 == <CPU A = reader> <CPU B = updater> read cyc = 9 write cyc = 10 write ns = 1000 read ns = 1000 read cyc_copy = 9 write cyc_copy = 10 output = (9, 1000)
If atomic read is ensured, output should be (9, 900) or (10, 1000). But, output in example case are not.
So, change updating sequence in order to correct this problem.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c b/arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c index fc6692e..bd6f56b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c @@ -93,11 +93,11 @@ static void notrace update_sched_clock(void) * detectable in cyc_to_fixed_sched_clock(). */ raw_local_irq_save(flags); - cd.epoch_cyc = cyc; + cd.epoch_cyc_copy = cyc; smp_wmb(); cd.epoch_ns = ns; smp_wmb(); - cd.epoch_cyc_copy = cyc; + cd.epoch_cyc = cyc; raw_local_irq_restore(flags); } -- 1.7.9.5
|  |