Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1220341

Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification

Show all headers | View raw

Sorry for delay,

On 09/02, Boqun Feng wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:39:23PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 09/01, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:59:23AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > And just in case, wake_up() differs in a sense that it doesn't even need
> > > > that STORE-LOAD barrier in try_to_wake_up(), we can rely on
> > > > wait_queue_head_t->lock. Assuming that wake_up() pairs with the "normal"
> > > > wait_event()-like code.
> >
> > Looks like, you have missed this part of my previous email. See below.
>
> I guess I need to think through this, though I haven't found any problem
> in wake_up() if we remove the STORE-LOAD barrier in try_to_wake_up().
> And I know that in wake_up(), try_to_wake_up() will be called with
> holding wait_queue_head_t->lock, however, only part of wait_event()
> holds the same lock, I can't figure out why the barrier is not needed
> because of the lock..

This is very simple. __wait_event() does

	for (;;) {
		prepare_to_wait_event(WQ, ...);	// takes WQ->lock

		if (CONDITION)
			break;

		schedule();
	}

and we have

	CONDITION = 1;
	wake_up(WQ);				// takes WQ->lock

on another side.

Suppose that __wait_event() wins and takes WQ->lock first. It can block
then. In this case wake_up() must see the result of set_current_state()
and list_add() when it takes the same lock, otherwise spin_lock() would
be simply buggy. So it will wake the waiter up.

At the same time, if __wait_event() takes this lock after wake_up(), it
can not miss CONDITION = 1. It must see it after it takes the lock, and
of course after it drops the lock too.

So I am not sure I understand your concerns in this case...

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-08-27 14:30 +0200
  Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-08-27 14:50 +0200
    Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-08-27 15:20 +0200
      Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-27 20:30 +0200
        Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2015-08-28 17:00 +0200
          Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-28 18:10 +0200
            Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 11:30 +0200
              Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-29 16:40 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 02:40 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-08-31 20:40 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-08-31 22:50 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 05:50 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-09-01 06:10 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-01 12:10 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 17:00 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-01 18:50 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 03:20 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-07 19:10 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 02:30 +0200
                Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2015-09-01 11:50 +0200

csiph-web