On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 09:06:05AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In any case, its all moot now, since Paul no longer requires schedule() to > > imply > > a full barrier. > > > > [...] > > Nevertheless from a least-surprise POV it might be worth guaranteeing it, > because > I bet there's tons of code that assumes that schedule() is a heavy operation > and > it's such an easy mistake to make. Since we are so close to having that > guarantee, > we might as well codify it?
FWIW, the arm64 __switch_to() has a heavy barrier (DSB) but the reason for this was to cope with potentially interrupted cache or TLB maintenance (which require a DSB on the same CPU) and thread migration to another CPU. -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
