Re: [patch 1/3] Create spin lock/spin unlock with distinct memorybarrier

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Nick Piggin (npiggin@xxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 03:52:55PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * X86 spinlock-mb mappings. Use standard spinlocks with acquire/release
> > + * semantics. Associated memory barriers are defined as no-ops, because the
> > + * spinlock LOCK-prefixed atomic operations imply a full memory barrier.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#define spin_lock__no_acquire			spin_lock
> > +#define spin_unlock__no_release			spin_unlock
> > +
> > +#define spin_lock_irq__no_acquire		spin_lock_irq
> > +#define spin_unlock_irq__no_release		spin_unlock_irq
> > +
> > +#define raw_spin_lock__no_acquire		raw_spin_lock
> > +#define raw_spin_unlock__no_release		raw_spin_unlock
> > +
> > +#define raw_spin_lock_irq__no_acquire		raw_spin_lock_irq
> > +#define raw_spin_unlock_irq__no_release		raw_spin_unlock_irq
> > +
> > +#define smp_acquire__after_spin_lock()		do { } while (0)
> > +#define smp_release__before_spin_unlock()	do { } while (0)
> > +
> > +#define smp_mb__after_spin_lock()		do { } while (0)
> > +#define smp_mb__before_spin_unlock()		do { } while (0)
> 
> Oh, and that one's wrong. loads can pass spin_unlock on x86 so it
> needs to be smp_mb().
> 

Good catch !

#if defined(CONFIG_X86_32) && \
        (defined(CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE) || defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE))
/*
 * On PPro SMP or if we are using OOSTORE, we use a locked operation to unlock
 * (PPro errata 66, 92)
 */
# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX LOCK_PREFIX
#else
# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX
#endif

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/