Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Don't allow compiler optimisation of svc_xprt_release_slot()

["bfields@fieldses.org" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:06:19PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-01-07 at 16:32 -0500, bfields@fieldses.org wrote:
> > So maybe we actually need
> > 
> >  static bool svc_xprt_has_something_to_do(struct svc_xprt *xprt)
> >  {
> > +	mb();
> 
> You would at best need a 'smp_rmb()'. There is nothing to gain from
> adding a write barrier here,

That's not my understanding.

What we have is basically:

	1			2
	----			----
	WRITE to A		WRITE to B

	READ from A and B	READ from A and B

and we want to guarantee that at least one of those two reads will see
both of the writes.

A read barrier only orders reads with respect to the barrier, it doesn't
do anything about writes, so doesn't guarantee anything here.

--b.



> and you don't even need a read barrier in
> the non-smp case.
> 
> >  	if (xprt->xpt_flags & ((1<<XPT_CONN)|(1<<XPT_CLOSE)))
> >  		return true;
> >  	if (xprt->xpt_flags & ((1<<XPT_DATA)|(1<<XPT_DEFERRED))) {
> > 
> > Then whichever memory barrier executes second guarantees that the
> > following check sees the result of both the XPT_DATA and xpt_nr_rqsts
> > changes.  I think....
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
> trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com
> 
>