Re: [PATCH] seqlock: serialize against writers

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> 
> Yeah, ideas crossed in the mail ;)
> 
> I could just force all of the seqbegins to hit the slowpath by hacking
> the code and see what happens (aside from slowing down, of course ;)
> 
> Question: Which seqlock_t does userspace use?  I assume it uses
> seqlock_t and not raw_seqlock_t.  But the only reason that I ask is that
> I converted raw_seqlock_t to use the new style as well to be consistent,
> even though it is not strictly necessary for the same reasons.  So if
> perchance userspace uses the raw variant, I could solve this issue by
> only re-working the seqlock_t variant.  Kind of a long shot, but figured
> I would mention it :)

I answered this on IRC, but this is for the rest of those reading this 
thread.

Userspace (vsyscalls) can only use raw_seqlock_t. And only the read 
version for that matter. Since the read of raw_seqlock_t is just that, a 
read, no writes, and no jumping to other functions on contention.

The vsyscalls should never use the -rt seqlock_t. Not modifying the raws 
here should make us golden.

-- Steve

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