Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen/spinlocks: fix placement of preempt_[dis|en]able()

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 13.03.2020 09:05, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -199,10 +199,10 @@ unsigned long _spin_lock_irqsave(spinlock_t *lock)
>  void _spin_unlock(spinlock_t *lock)
>  {
>      arch_lock_release_barrier();
> -    preempt_enable();
>      LOCK_PROFILE_REL;
>      rel_lock(&lock->debug);
>      add_sized(&lock->tickets.head, 1);
> +    preempt_enable();
>      arch_lock_signal();
>  }

arch_lock_signal() is a barrier on Arm, hence just like for patch 1
I wonder whether the insertion wouldn't better come after it.

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel