From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Yang, Xiaowei" <xiaowei.yang@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Fix memory order issue inside pv spinlock
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:40:47 +0800
Message-ID: <4AA4B8FF.9070905@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

barrier() can't prevent reads after it not being reordered with older writes to 
different locates before it. Because of it, I can't bring up > 4 HVM guests on 
one SMP machine. Use mb() instead.

Signed-off-by: Yang Xiaowei <xiaowei.yang@intel.com>

diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
index 5601506..9dee5f8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
@@ -324,7 +325,7 @@ static void xen_spin_unlock(struct raw_spinlock *lock)
         xl->lock = 0;           /* release lock */

         /* make sure unlock happens before kick */
-       barrier();
+       mb();

         if (unlikely(xl->spinners))
                 xen_spin_unlock_slow(xl);

Thanks,
Xiaowei