On Fri, 19 Jul 2013, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 07/19/2013 02:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > - if (lock->owner)
> > - retval = lock->owner->on_cpu;
> > + owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
> > + if (owner)
> > + retval = owner->on_cpu;
> > rcu_read_unlock();
> > /*
> > * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just
> > acquired
>
> I am fine with this change. However, the compiler is smart enough to
> not do two memory accesses to the same memory location. So this will
> not change the generated code. Below is the relevant x86 code for
> that section of code:
That's true for your particular compiler, but it's not guaranteed at
all. So it matters even when your compiler generates the same
code. Others might not. There is a world outside of x8664.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
