On 08/14/2017 10:42 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
> On 14/08/17 15:39, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>
+#define spin_lock_kick(l) \
+({ \to understand why
you need a stronger one here
+smp_mb();
On 14/08/17 15:39, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
+#define spin_lock_kick(l) \
+({ \to understand why
you need a stronger one here
+smp_mb(); \
arch_lock_signal() has already a barrier for ARM.
>>
>> +#define spin_lock_kick(l) \
>> +({ \to understand why
>> you need a stronger one here
>> +smp_mb(); \
>
> arch_lock_signal() has already a barrier for ARM. So we have a double
> barrier
Hi Boris,
On 08/08/17 22:45, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
While waiting for a lock we may want to periodically run some
code. This code may, for example, allow the caller to release
resources held by it that are no longer needed in the critical
section protected by the lock.
Specifically, this featur
While waiting for a lock we may want to periodically run some
code. This code may, for example, allow the caller to release
resources held by it that are no longer needed in the critical
section protected by the lock.
Specifically, this feature will be needed by scrubbing code where
the scrubber,
