* Christoph Lameter ([email protected]) wrote:
> > The cpu_read acts as a safeguard checking that we do not change CPU
> > between the read and the cmpxchg. If we are preempted between the "c"
> > read and the cpu_read, we could do a !cpu_node_match(c, node) check that
> > would apply to the wrong cpu.
>
> C is not pointing to a specific cpu. It can only be used in CPU_xx ops to
> address the currrent cpu.
>
> > > @@ -1800,19 +1792,19 @@ static void __always_inline slab_free(st
> > > * then any change of cpu_slab will cause the cmpxchg to fail
> > > * since the freelist pointers are unique per slab.
> > > */
> > > - if (unlikely(page != c->page || c->node < 0)) {
> > > - __slab_free(s, page, x, addr, c->offset);
> > > + if (unlikely(page != __CPU_READ(c->page) ||
> > > + __CPU_READ(c->node) < 0)) {
> > > + __slab_free(s, page, x, addr, __CPU_READ(c->offset));
> >
> > And same question as above : what happens if we fail after executing the
> > __slab_free.. is it valid to do it twice ?
>
> __slab_free is always successful and will never cause a repeat of the
> loop.
Then what happens if we are migrated between the end of __slab_free and
the CPU_CMPXCHG ? The cmpxchg would fail, and the __slab_free will be
done twice ?
--
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]
