On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:55:14PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > +  * To avoid missed wakeup of reader, we need to make sure
> > > +  * that task state and waiter->task are properly synchronized.
> > > +  *
> > > +  *     wakeup                 sleep
> > > +  *     ------                 -----
> > > +  * __rwsem_mark_wake:   rwsem_down_read_failed*:
> > > +  *   [S] waiter->task     [S] set_current_state(state)
> > > +  *       MB                   MB
> > > +  * try_to_wake_up:
> > > +  *   [L] state            [L] waiter->task
> > > +  *
> > > +  * For the wakeup path, the original lock release-acquire pair
> > > +  * does not provide enough guarantee of proper synchronization.
> > > +  */
> > > + smp_mb();
> > > +
> > >   adjustment = woken * RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS - adjustment;
> > >   if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list)) {
> > >           /* hit end of list above */
> > 

> try_to_wake_up() does:
> 
>       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
>       smp_mb__after_spinlock();
>       if (!(p->state & state))
> 
> My understanding is that this smp_mb__after_spinlock() provides us with
> the guarantee you described above.  The smp_mb__after_spinlock() should
> represent a 'cheaper way' to provide such a guarantee.

Right, I don't see what problem is being fixed here either. The scenario
in the comment is already closed by the smp_mb__after_spinlock() you
mention.

And it is fine to rely on that, we do in other places.

> If this understanding is correct, the remaining question would be about
> whether you want to rely on (and document) the smp_mb__after_spinlock()
> in the callsite in question (the comment in wake_up_q()
> 
>    /*
>     * wake_up_process() implies a wmb() to pair with the queueing
>     * in wake_q_add() so as not to miss wakeups.
>     */
> 

So that comment is about the ordering required for wake_q_add() vs
wake_up_q(). But yes, wmb is a little confusing. I suppose I was
thinking of the NULL store vs the wakeup (store), but that doesn't
really make much sense.

And wake_up_process() being a mb means it also implies a wmb; if such is
all that is required for the scenario at hand.



Reply via email to