[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v15 13/15] pvqspinlock: Only kick CPU at unlock time
On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 10:55:48PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > @@ -219,24 +236,30 @@ static void pv_wait_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node) > } > > /* > + * Called after setting next->locked = 1 & lock acquired. > + * Check if the the CPU has been halted. If so, set the _Q_SLOW_VAL flag > + * and put an entry into the lock hash table to be waken up at unlock time. > */ > -static void pv_kick_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node) > +static void pv_scan_next(struct qspinlock *lock, struct mcs_spinlock *node) I'm not too sure about that name change.. > { > struct pv_node *pn = (struct pv_node *)node; > + struct __qspinlock *l = (void *)lock; > > /* > + * Transition CPU state: halted => hashed > + * Quit if the transition failed. > */ > + if (cmpxchg(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_hashed) != vcpu_halted) > + return; > + > + /* > + * Put the lock into the hash table & set the _Q_SLOW_VAL in the lock. > + * As this is the same CPU that will check the _Q_SLOW_VAL value and > + * the hash table later on at unlock time, no atomic instruction is > + * needed. > + */ > + WRITE_ONCE(l->locked, _Q_SLOW_VAL); > + (void)pv_hash(lock, pn); > } This is broken. The unlock path relies on: pv_hash() MB l->locked = SLOW such that when it observes SLOW, it must then also observe a consistent bucket. The above can have us do pv_hash_find() _before_ we actually hash the lock, which will result in us triggering that BUG_ON() in there. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |