From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932505AbbEVNiw (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 09:38:52 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:49352 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932481AbbEVNit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 09:38:49 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 15:38:43 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: mingo@kernel.org
Cc: vincent.weaver@maine.edu, eranian@google.com, jolsa@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] perf/x86: Simplify put_exclusive_constraints
Message-ID: <20150522133843.GF3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20150522132905.416122812@infradead.org>
 <20150522133136.355195312@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150522133136.355195312@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 03:29:16PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> @@ -2149,22 +2147,25 @@ static void intel_put_excl_constraints(s
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
> +	 * If event was actually assigned, then mark the counter state as
> +	 * unused now.
>  	 */
> +	if (hwc->idx >= 0) {
> +		xl = &excl_cntrs->states[tid];
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * put_constraint may be called from x86_schedule_events()
> +		 * which already has the lock held so here make locking
> +		 * conditional.
> +		 */
> +		if (!xl->sched_started)
> +			raw_spin_lock(&excl_cntrs->lock);
>  
>  		xl->state[hwc->idx] = INTEL_EXCL_UNUSED;
>  
> +		if (!xl->sched_started)
> +			raw_spin_unlock(&excl_cntrs->lock);
> +	}
>  }

Hmm, we could probably avoid the lock and use WRITE_ONCE() to clear this
state, but I'm too tired to really think about it.