Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752918AbZGCHrp (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 03:47:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751118AbZGCHrf (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 03:47:35 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f218.google.com ([209.85.220.218]:52797 "EHLO mail-fx0-f218.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750799AbZGCHre (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 03:47:34 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=s/YeO7PV1yACydcQ7tw1n/R82dDNU6ajHiunydzEqPMpZjookJL3NyXFRH111+yJkt iZHOmvTxkaCnZ18mOUeiNUKqxr3lHcJ5KbwQgQGqJiyz5Zh4lh3Xz48YRoFg2zhT0+tC 2/aWyB4dMixxBZqUuEGriH2OPDoACmKIUgtko= Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 07:47:31 +0000 From: Jarek Poplawski To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Davide Libenzi , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , fbl@redhat.com, nhorman@redhat.com, davem@redhat.com, htejun@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock Message-ID: <20090703074730.GB4847@ff.dom.local> References: <20090702063259.GA3429@jolsa.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> <20090702063624.GC3429@jolsa.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> <4A4C5983.7000501@gmail.com> <20090703074126.GB2902@jolsa.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20090703074126.GB2902@jolsa.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> 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: 1338 Lines: 45 On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 09:41:26AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 07:39:04AM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > > Jiri Olsa a ?crit : > > > > Adding smp_mb__after_lock define to be used as a smp_mb call after > > > > a lock. > > > > > > > > Making it nop for x86, since {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are > > > > full memory barriers. > > > > > > > > wbr, > > > > jirka > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa > > > > > > > > > Maybe we should remind that sk_has_helper() is always called > > > right after a call to read_lock() as in : > > > > > > read_lock(&sk->sk_callback_lock); > > > if (sk_has_sleeper(sk)) > > > wake_up_interruptible_all(sk->sk_sleep); > > > > Agreed, that'd be to have it in the source code comment. > > > > > > - Davide > > > > ok, I'll add it to the 1/2 part in v5 > Btw., there is a tiny typo: - receive callbacks. Adding fuctions sock_poll_wait and sock_has_sleeper + receive callbacks. Adding fuctions sock_poll_wait and sk_has_sleeper Jarek P. -- 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/