From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ceph: fix improper use of smp_mb__before_atomic()
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 22:55:43 +0200
Message-ID: <20190509205452.GA4359@andrea>
References: <1556568902-12464-1-git-send-email-andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
 <1556568902-12464-5-git-send-email-andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
 <20190430082332.GB2677@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAAM7YA=YOM79GJK8b7OOQbzT_-sYRD2UFHYithY7Li1yQt5Hog@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAM7YA=YOM79GJK8b7OOQbzT_-sYRD2UFHYithY7Li1yQt5Hog@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: "Yan, Zheng" <ukernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Yan, Zheng" <zyan@redhat.com>, Sage Weil <sage@redhat.com>, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>, ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
List-Id: ceph-devel.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 05:08:43PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 4:26 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:15:00PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > This barrier only applies to the read-modify-write operations; in
> > > particular, it does not apply to the atomic64_set() primitive.
> > >
> > > Replace the barrier with an smp_mb().
> > >
> >
> > > @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ static inline void __ceph_dir_set_complete(struct ceph_inode_info *ci,
> > >                                          long long release_count,
> > >                                          long long ordered_count)
> > >  {
> > > -     smp_mb__before_atomic();
> >
> > same
> >         /*
> >          * XXX: the comment that explain this barrier goes here.
> >          */
> >
> 
> makes sure operations that setup readdir cache (update page cache and
> i_size) are strongly ordered with following atomic64_set.

Thanks for the suggestion, Yan.

To be clear: would you like me to integrate your comment and resend?
any other suggestions?

Thanx,
  Andrea


> 
> > > +     smp_mb();
> >
> > >       atomic64_set(&ci->i_complete_seq[0], release_count);
> > >       atomic64_set(&ci->i_complete_seq[1], ordered_count);
> > >  }
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > >