On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 07:03:12PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 10:36 +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > - preempt_disable();
> > - c = this_cpu_ptr(s->cpu_slab);
> > + do {
> > + tid = this_cpu_read(s->cpu_slab->tid);
> > + c = this_cpu_ptr(s->cpu_slab);
> > + } while (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT) && unlikely(tid != c->tid));
> > + barrier();
>
> I don't see the compiler reodering the object/page stores below, since c
> is updated in the loop anyway. Is this really necessary (same goes for
> slab_free)? The generated code by gcc 4.8 looks correct without it.
> Additionally, the implied barriers for preemption control aren't really
> the same semantics used here (if that is actually the reason why you are
> using them).
Hello,
I'd like to use tid as a pivot so it should be fetched before fetching
anything on c. Is it impossible even if !CONFIG_PREEMPT without
barrier()?
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
