Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:34:50 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To:     John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v3 03/15] printk: add missing memory barrier to
 wake_up_klogd()
Message-ID: <Yl/9iDqRL3zKBoSJ@alley>
References: <20220419234637.357112-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
 <20220419234637.357112-4-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220419234637.357112-4-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed 2022-04-20 01:52:25, John Ogness wrote:
> It is important that any new records are visible to preparing
> waiters before the waker checks if the wait queue is empty.
> Otherwise it is possible that:
> 
> - there are new records available
> - the waker sees an empty wait queue and does not wake
> - the preparing waiter sees no new records and begins to wait
> 
> This is exactly the problem that the function description of
> waitqueue_active() warns about.
> 
> Use wq_has_sleeper() instead of waitqueue_active() because it
> includes the necessary full memory barrier.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>

Great catch! Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>

Best Regards,
Petr