* Peter Zijlstra ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 14:35 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra ([email protected]) wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 13:16 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > > * Peter Zijlstra ([email protected]) wrote:
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > include/asm-i386/local.h | 7 ++++---
> > > > > include/asm-x86_64/local.h | 7 ++++---
> > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Index: linux-2.6/include/asm-i386/local.h
> > > > > ===================================================================
> > > > > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/asm-i386/local.h
> > > > > +++ linux-2.6/include/asm-i386/local.h
> > > > > @@ -197,11 +197,12 @@ static __inline__ long local_sub_return(
> > > > > #define __local_begin(__flags) \
> > > > > { \
> > > > > (__flags) = 0; \
> > > > > - preempt_disable(); \
> > > > > + migrate_disable(); \
> > > >
> > > > Brrrr. That's wrong. Your non atomic __local*() updates only makes sense
> > > > when preempt_disable/enable() protects them from concurrent threads on
> > > > the same CPU, which is not the case of migrate_disable/enable(). This is
> > > > why I suggest that you use local_begin/end() mapped to
> > > > migrate_disable/enable() for normal local variables, and, if you really
> > > > want a __local_begin/end(), then it should be mapped to
> > > > preempt_disable/enable() and should state that it provides no protection
> > > > against interrupts.
> > >
> > > Sure, but on -rt it does suffice, this part of the patch is rather WIP.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hrm, how can it suffice, I wonder ? migrate_disable() does not protect
> > against other threads on the same CPU, so you could suffer from
> > concurrent updates to the same variables. How is it different in -rt ?
>
> I thought the idea was that all these local_* operation were atomic wrt
> to the local cpu.
>
Yes, they are. But your __local_*() variants are not. They require a
full preempt_disable because they do not execute atomically.
So having local_begin/end() -> migrate_disable/enable() is ok.
And __local_begin/end() -> preempt_disable/enable() is ok.
I just want to make the naming and usage consistent with the protection
offered.
Mathieu
> The only difference with -rt is that we generally don't care about
> interrupts.
>
> Anyway, I'm dropping all this local stuff, and just hard code it right
> into slub.c
>
>
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
