Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 3 Jul 2020 13:36:03 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, mgorman@suse.de,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, david@fromorbit.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched: Better document ttwu()
Message-ID: <20200703113603.GL117543@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200702125211.GQ4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <jhjd05d92y3.mognet@arm.com>
 <20200703083012.GU4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200703083012.GU4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 10:30:12AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 07:39:16PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > > @@ -3134,8 +3274,12 @@ static inline void prepare_task(struct task_struct *next)
> > >       /*
> > >        * Claim the task as running, we do this before switching to it
> > >        * such that any running task will have this set.
> > > +	 *
> > > +	 * __schedule()'s rq->lock and smp_mb__after_spin_lock() orders this
> > > +	 * store against prior state change of @next, also see
> > > +	 * try_to_wake_up(), specifically smp_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu).
> > 
> > smp_*cond*_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu, <blah>)
> 
> Both, but yeah.. arguably the cond one is the more important one.

Ah no, this one really want to match the WF_ON_CPU case. I'll clarify
non-the-less.