Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Unconditional PV kick with _Q_SLOW_VAL

From: Davidlohr Bueso
Date: Sat Aug 01 2015 - 14:01:41 EST


On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 22:21 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed
> wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state
> variables adding to complexity. As the chance of spurious wakeup is very
> low, it is easier and safer to just do an unconditional kick at unlock
> time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@xxxxxx>

Please keep tags from previous versions ;)

--
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/