LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATH -mm -v2] Fix a race condtion of oops_in_progress
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:10:38 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4918DB8E.2020004@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1226365518.6081.90.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com>

Huang Ying wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 15:35 +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>>>>> As far as I know, barriers don't cause changes to be visible on other
>>>>> CPUs faster too. It just guarantees corresponding operations after will
>>>>> not get executed until that before have finished. And, I don't think we
>>>>> need make changes to be visible on other CPUs faster.
>>>> You're correct that barrier() has no impact on other CPUs.  wmb() and rmb() do. 
>>>>   If we don't need to make changes visible any faster, what's the point in using 
>>>> atomic_set()?  It's not any less racy.  atomic_inc() and atomic_dec() would be 
>>>> less racy, but you're not using those.
>>> In default bust_spinlocks() implementation in lib/bust_spinlocks.c,
>>> atomic_inc() and atomic_dec_and_test() is used. Which is used by x86
>>> too. In some other architecture, atomic_set() is used to replace
>>> "oops_in_progress = <xxx>". So this patch fixes architectures which use
>>> default bust_spinlocks(), other architectures can be fixed by
>>> corresponding architecture developers.
>> I think Chris is right.
>> So, I reccomend to read Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
>>
>> Almost architecture gurantee atomic_inc cause barrier implicitly.
>> but not _all_ architecture.
> 
> Yes. atomic_inc() doesn't imply barrier on all architecture. But we
> should not add barriers before all atomic_inc(), just ones needed. Can
> you figure out which ones in the patch should has barrier added?

You need barriers *after* writes, and *before* reads.  Adding barriers to the 
oops path should be extremely cheap for performance, unless oopsing is a common 
occurrence, in which case we have bigger problems.

-- Chris

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-11  1:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-29  8:26 Huang Ying
2008-10-29  8:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-29  8:42   ` Huang Ying
2008-10-29 14:51 ` Chris Snook
2008-10-30  2:02   ` Huang Ying
2008-10-31 16:42     ` Chris Snook
2008-11-03  1:52       ` Huang Ying
2008-11-03 18:44         ` Chris Snook
2008-11-04  1:41           ` Huang Ying
2008-11-10  7:35             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-10 18:45               ` Chris Snook
2008-11-11  1:05               ` Huang Ying
2008-11-11  1:10                 ` Chris Snook [this message]
2008-11-11  1:19                   ` Huang Ying

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4918DB8E.2020004@redhat.com \
    --to=csnook@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATH -mm -v2] Fix a race condtion of oops_in_progress' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).