From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Edward Falk <efalk@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix x86_64 _spin_lock_irqsave()
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:38:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060824213828.5504b4de.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p7364gifx8o.fsf@verdi.suse.de>
On 24 Aug 2006 08:45:11 +0200
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:
> Edward Falk <efalk@google.com> writes:
>
> > Add spin_lock_string_flags and _raw_spin_lock_flags() to
> > asm-x86_64/spinlock.h so that _spin_lock_irqsave() has the same
> > semantics on x86_64 as it does on i386 and does *not* have interrupts
> > disabled while it is waiting for the lock.
>
> Did it fix anything for you?
>
It's the rendezvous-via-IPI problem. Suppose we want to capture all CPUs
in an IPI handler (TSC sync, for example).
- CPUa holds read_lock(&tasklist_lock)
- CPUb is spinning in write_lock_irq(&taslist_lock)
- CPUa enters its IPI handler and spins
- CPUb never takes the IPI and we're dead.
Re-enabling interrupts while we spin will prevent that. But I suspect that
if we ever want to implement IPI rendezvous (and cannot use the
stop_machine_run() thing) then we might still have problems. A valid
optimisation (which we use in some places) is:
local_irq_save(flags);
<stuff>
write_lock(lock);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-25 4:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-24 2:57 Edward Falk
2006-08-24 3:10 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-24 4:48 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-24 15:53 ` Martin Bligh
2006-08-26 7:52 ` Keith Owens
2006-08-24 6:45 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-24 11:04 ` Suleiman Souhlal
2006-08-24 11:13 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-24 11:32 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-24 12:33 ` Suleiman Souhlal
2006-08-24 13:21 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-24 13:44 ` Suleiman Souhlal
2006-08-25 4:38 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-08-25 5:33 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-25 6:21 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060824213828.5504b4de.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=efalk@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome