Turns out that compiler writers are a bit more aggressive about optimizing
than one might expect. This patch prevents a number of such optimizations
from messing up rcu_deference(). This is not merely a theoretical
problem, as evidenced by the rmb() in mce_log().
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
rcupdate.h | 14 +++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.22/include/linux/rcupdate.h
linux-2.6.22-volrcud/include/linux/rcupdate.h
--- linux-2.6.22/include/linux/rcupdate.h 2007-07-08 16:32:17.000000000
-0700
+++ linux-2.6.22-volrcud/include/linux/rcupdate.h 2007-07-11
17:21:09.000000000 -0700
@@ -217,6 +217,18 @@ extern int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu);
local_bh_enable(); \
} while(0)
+/*
+ * Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching accesses. The compiler
+ * is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of ACCESS_ONCE(),
+ * but only when the compiler is aware of some particular ordering. One way
+ * to make the compiler aware of ordering is to put the two invocations of
+ * ACCESS_ONCE() in different C statements.
+ *
+ * This macro does absolutely -nothing- to prevent the CPU from reordering,
+ * merging, or refetching absolutely anything at any time.
+ */
+#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *)&(x))
+
/**
* rcu_dereference - fetch an RCU-protected pointer in an
* RCU read-side critical section. This pointer may later
@@ -228,7 +240,7 @@ extern int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu);
*/
#define rcu_dereference(p) ({ \
- typeof(p) _________p1 = p; \
+ typeof(p) _________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \
smp_read_barrier_depends(); \
(_________p1); \
})
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
