On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 10:20:05AM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 07/06/20 16:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > + if (!preempt && prev_state && prev_state == prev->state) {
>
> I think the compiler won't optimize `prev_state == prev->state` out because of
> the smp_mb__after_spinlock() which implies a compiler barrier. Still not sure
> if it's worth making prev->state accesses a READ_ONCE()?
task_struct::state is one of the very rare (and ancient) variables
that's declared volatile.
We should probably clean that up some day, but so far I've not attempted
to do such a thing.
