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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1210459 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init() Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 14:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex  in jump_lable_init() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-08-20 20:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex  in jump_lable_init() Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 05:20 +0200

#1210459 — [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
jump label table.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>
---
 kernel/jump_label.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/jump_label.c b/kernel/jump_label.c
index f7dd15d537f9..df1a7fbe7cd5 100644
--- a/kernel/jump_label.c
+++ b/kernel/jump_label.c
@@ -205,7 +205,6 @@ void __init jump_label_init(void)
 	struct static_key *key = NULL;
 	struct jump_entry *iter;
 
-	jump_label_lock();
 	jump_label_sort_entries(iter_start, iter_stop);
 
 	for (iter = iter_start; iter < iter_stop; iter++) {
@@ -229,7 +228,6 @@ void __init jump_label_init(void)
 #endif
 	}
 	static_key_initialized = true;
-	jump_label_unlock();
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
-- 
2.1.0

--
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/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1210662 — Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:14:29PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote:
> The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
> sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
> jump label table.

It also doesn't hurt to have it. Its better to be consistent and
conservative with locking unless there is a pressing need.
--
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/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1210834 — Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:29:03PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:14:29PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote:
> > The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
> > sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
> > jump label table.
> 
> It also doesn't hurt to have it. Its better to be consistent and
> conservative with locking unless there is a pressing need.

Yes, it has no real hurt. IMHO it may cause confusion that the function
jump_label_init() may run in two different thread context simultaneously. 
Anyway if you guys don't think so, I can drop this patch.

Thanks,
Kevin

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web