Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754459AbYKKRXy (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:23:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751767AbYKKRXp (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:23:45 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:58152 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751594AbYKKRXo (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:23:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:24:21 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Jiri Pirko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] atkbd: cancel delayed work before freeing its structure Message-ID: <20081111182421.GA22518@redhat.com> References: <20081105153140.25132ca1@psychotron.englab.brq.redhat.com> <20081107154325.GD9368@redhat.com> <20081111145155.GA24881@anvil.corenet.prv> <20081111172050.GC18214@redhat.com> <20081111112741.ZZRA012@mailhub.coreip.homeip.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081111112741.ZZRA012@mailhub.coreip.homeip.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2160 Lines: 65 On 11/11, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 06:20:50PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 11/11, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > But let me repeat, if queue_delayed_work() fails becuase this work is > > already queued we (in this particular case) need mb(), not wmb(). Or > > atkbd_schedule_event_work() can miss a bit in ->event_mask. So I think > > this wmb() is misleading. > > Could you please explain why wmb() is not enough and full mb() is > needed in this case? I thought that if write happens before we decide > whether to schedule event_work or not it would be enough. Yes, but how we decide whether to schedule or not? Let's suppose we do this without mb(). say, queue_work() starts with if (test_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING)) // no barrier semantics return; In that case the code in atkbd_schedule_event_work() set_bit(event_bit, &atkbd->event_mask); wmb(); schedule_delayed_work(atkbd->event_work); can be reordered (if ->event_work is queued) as schedule_delayed_work(atkbd->event_work); set_bit(event_bit, &atkbd->event_mask); wmb() can only serialize STOREs, not STORE vs LOAD. The result of set_bit() can be "delayed". Now, run_workqueue() does // again, no barrier semantics, but this doesn't matter clear_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING); call atkbd_schedule_event_work() if (test_and_clear_bit(atkbd->event_mask)) atkbd_set_xxx(); and we can miss an event. > > And unneeded because queue_work() implies mb(), > > but this is not really documented. > > It would be great if we can get it documented and then i'd drop *mb() > from atkbd. It is not easy document the current behaviour. Actually, perhaps run_workqueue() needs smp_mb__after_clear_bit()... But for this particular case this doesn't matter. Note that atkbd_event_work() does test_and_clear_bit(), it can't be re-ordered with clear_bit(WORK_STRUCT_PENDING), otherwise even mb() can't help. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/