On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 07:00:02PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > No, I meant _from_ the LL load, not _to_ a later load.
>
> Sorry, I'm still not following enough to give you a definitive answer on
> that. Could you give an example, please? These sequences usually run in
> a loop, so the conditional branch back (based on the status flag) is where
> the read-after-read comes in.
>
> Any control dependencies from the loaded data exist regardless of the status
> flag.
Basically what Waiman ended up doing, something like:
if (cmpxchg_relaxed(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_hashed) !=
vcpu_halted)
return;
WRITE_ONCE(l->locked, _Q_SLOW_VAL);
Where the STORE depends on the LL value being 'complete'.
For any RmW we can only create a control dependency from the LOAD. The
the same could be done for something like:
if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&obj->refs))
WRITE_ONCE(obj->foo, 1);
Where we only do the STORE if we acquire the reference. While the
WRITE_ONCE() will not be ordered against the increment, it is ordered
against the LL and we know it must not be 0.
Per the LL/SC loop we'll have observed a !0 value and committed the SC
(which need not be visible or ordered against any later store) but both
STORES (SC and the WRITE_ONCE) must be after the ->refs LOAD.
