lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] sched: TTWU, IPI, and assorted stuff
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:48:02AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:20:47AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> > > @@ -2615,7 +2617,8 @@ try_to_wake_up(struct task_struct *p, unsigned int state, int wake_flags)
> > > * let the waker make forward progress. This is safe because IRQs are
> > > * disabled and the IPI will deliver after on_cpu is cleared.
> > > */
> > > - if (READ_ONCE(p->on_cpu) && ttwu_queue_wakelist(p, cpu, wake_flags | WF_ON_RQ))
> > > + if (smp_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu) &&
>
> Given the x86 memory model, this only protects against the compiler
> reordering accesses in ttwu_queue_wakelist() against the fetch of
> p->on_cpu, correct?

Yes.

> Don't get me wrong, I do see some potential compiler misorderings,
> including with cpu_rq(cpu)->nr_running. Just curious.

Given this is arch independent code, I'd better write generic code, and
there I really think this wants to be acquire. I'll also try and write a
comment for next time.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-19 20:12    [W:0.251 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site