Hiya,
On 15/04/2021 17:45, Will Deacon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:26:46PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 16:02:29 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
acqui
On 4/15/21 12:45 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
With that in mind, it would probably be a good idea to eyeball the qspinlock
slowpath as well, as that uses both atomic_cond_read_acquire() and
atomic_try_cmpxchg_relaxed().
It seems plausible that the same thing could occur here in qspinlock:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:26:46PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 16:02:29 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> > > While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> > > acquire the lock without holding wait_l
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 16:02:29 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> > While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> > acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
> > checking the value with the atomic_c
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:28:21PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 05:03:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -73,9 +75,8 @@ void queued_write_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock)
> >
> > /* When no more readers or writers, set the locked flag */
> > do {
> > -
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:37:58PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:28:21PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 05:03:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
> > > index 4786dd271b45..22aecc
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:28:21PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 05:03:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> > > While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> > > acquire the lock without holdin
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 05:03:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> > While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> > acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
> > checking the value with the a
On 4/15/21 10:25 AM, Ali Saidi wrote:
While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
checking the value with the atomic_cond_read_acquire(), but only truly
acquires the lock when the compare-and-exchange is comp
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
> checking the value with the atomic_cond_read_acquire(), but only truly
> acquires the lock when the c
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:25:52PM +, Ali Saidi wrote:
> While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
> acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
> checking the value with the atomic_cond_read_acquire(), but only truly
> acquires the lock when the c
While this code is executed with the wait_lock held, a reader can
acquire the lock without holding wait_lock. The writer side loops
checking the value with the atomic_cond_read_acquire(), but only truly
acquires the lock when the compare-and-exchange is completed
successfully which isn’t ordered.
12 matches
Mail list logo
