lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 04/19] sched: Prepare for Core-wide rq->lock
On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 06:35:36PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 5:14 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> > Ah, indeed so.. rq_lockp() could do with an assertion, not sure how to
> > sanely do that. Anyway, double_rq_unlock() is simple enough to fix, we
> > can simply flip the unlock()s.
> >
> > ( I'm suffering a cold and am really quite slow atm )
> >
> > How's this then?
> >
> > ---
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index f732642e3e09..3a534c0c1c46 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -290,6 +290,10 @@ static void sched_core_assert_empty(void)
> > static void __sched_core_enable(void)
> > {
> > static_branch_enable(&__sched_core_enabled);
> > + /*
> > + * Ensure raw_spin_rq_*lock*() have completed before flipping.
> > + */
> > + synchronize_sched();
>
> synchronize_sched() seems no longer exist...

Bah.. Paul, why did that go away? I realize RCU merged in the sched and
bh flavours, but I still find it expressive to use sync_sched() vs
preempt_disable().

Anyway, just use sync_rcu().

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-28 13:04    [W:0.178 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site