Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754151Ab0AUQcY (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:32:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753934Ab0AUQcV (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:32:21 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.125]:51332 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753925Ab0AUQcU (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:32:20 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=r_nf4N-T2GkA:10 a=7U3hwN5JcxgA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=6XqCWgjLSEsTxjFNj7sA:9 a=jTzW9MYidBjdB4hPehAA:7 a=QPl0TQgbXGQ7CstUh4Se0lPj5g4A:4 a=jeBq3FmKZ4MA:10 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.89.75 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] introduce sys_membarrier(): process-wide memory barrier (v5) From: Steven Rostedt Reply-To: rostedt@goodmis.org To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , Oleg Nesterov , Ingo Molnar , akpm@linux-foundation.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <20100121162249.GA15761@Krystal> References: <1263488625.4244.333.camel@laptop> <20100114175449.GA15387@Krystal> <20100114183739.GA18435@Krystal> <1263495132.28171.3861.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20100114193355.GA23436@Krystal> <1263926259.4283.757.camel@laptop> <1263928006.4283.762.camel@laptop> <1264073212.4283.1158.camel@laptop> <20100121160729.GB12842@Krystal> <1264090331.31321.212.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20100121162249.GA15761@Krystal> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Organization: Kihon Technologies Inc. Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:32:09 -0500 Message-ID: <1264091529.31321.223.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 848 Lines: 26 On Thu, 2010-01-21 at 11:22 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote: > > You may also need spin_lock_irqsave, et al. variants too. > > Yep, or we simply use the local_irq_save/restore separately. That could > be a good idea given that only few specialized sites are affected. If it gets used more often, then we need to consider RT. RT modifies spin_lock_irqsave into a standard mutex that does not disable interrupts. But if something does: local_irq_save(flags); spin_lock_mb(&lock); [...] Then it will break RT (if lock is to be converted). -- Steve -- 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/