Re: IGMP and rwlock: Dead ocurred again on TILEPro

[David Miller]

From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:04:13 -0500

> On 2/17/2011 5:53 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:49:46 -0500
>>
>>> The fix is to disable interrupts for the arch_read_lock family of methods. 
>> How does that help handle the race when it happens between different
>> cpus, instead of between IRQ and non-IRQ context on the same CPU?
> 
> There's no race in that case, since the lock code properly backs off and
> retries until the other cpu frees it.  The distinction here is that the
> non-IRQ context is "wedged" by the IRQ context.
> 
>> Why don't you just use the generic spinlock based rwlock code on Tile,
>> since that is all that your atomic instructions can handle
>> sufficiently?
> 
> The tile-specific code encodes reader/writer information in the same 32-bit
> word that the test-and-set instruction manipulates, so it's more efficient
> both in space and time.  This may not really matter for rwlocks, since no
> one cares much about them any more, but that was the motivation.

Ok, but IRQ disabling is going to be very expensive.
--
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/