On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 04:04:30PM +0100, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 07/16/2015 10:07 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 07/16/2015 01:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:18:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>> On 07/15/2015 05:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> /*
> +
On 07/16/2015 10:07 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
On 07/16/2015 01:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:18:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
On 07/15/2015 05:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
/*
+ * A failed cmpxchg doesn't provide any memory-ordering
guarantees,
+ * so we
On 07/16/2015 01:42 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:18:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
On 07/15/2015 05:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
/*
+* A failed cmpxchg doesn't provide any memory-ordering guarantees,
+* so we need a barrier to order the read of th
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:18:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 07/15/2015 05:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > /*
> >+ * A failed cmpxchg doesn't provide any memory-ordering guarantees,
> >+ * so we need a barrier to order the read of the node data in
> >+ * pv_unhash *after* we'v
On 07/15/2015 05:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:13:32PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed
wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state
variables adding to complexity. As the chance o
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:13:32PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed
> wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state
> variables adding to complexity. As the chance of spurious wakeup is very
> low, it is easi
The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed
wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state
variables adding to complexity. As the chance of spurious wakeup is very
low, it is easier and safer to just do an unconditional kick at unlock
time.
Signed
7 matches
Mail list logo
