Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:01:13 -0400 | From | Waiman Long <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Unconditional PV kick with _Q_SLOW_VAL |
| |
On 07/31/2015 04:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 04:12:36PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed >> wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state >> variables adding to complexity. As the chance of spurious wakeup is very >> low, it is easier and safer to just do an unconditional kick at unlock >> time. > This needs to better spell out the race; my still sleeping brain doesn't > want to co-operate and its generally better to spell out these things > anyway.
Sure, I will add a comment to talk about the possible race.
Cheers, Longman
| |