From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752780AbcEWVu6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 23 May 2016 17:50:58 -0400
Received: from g1t6216.austin.hp.com ([15.73.96.123]:52199 "EHLO
	g1t6216.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752633AbcEWVu5 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 May 2016 17:50:57 -0400
Message-ID: <1464040195.2519.5.camel@j-VirtualBox>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/mutex: Set and clear owner using WRITE_ONCE()
From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hpe.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: jason.low2@hp.com, Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@hpe.com>, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 14:49:55 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20160523213123.c5qdhz23xy5ziqik@linux-uzut.site>
References: <1463696630.2587.95.camel@j-VirtualBox>
	 <573F734C.7050708@hpe.com> <20160521010044.GC28231@linux-uzut.site>
	 <1464036006.2479.35.camel@j-VirtualBox>
	 <20160523213123.c5qdhz23xy5ziqik@linux-uzut.site>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 14:31 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2016, Jason Low wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 18:00 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> On Fri, 20 May 2016, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>
> >> >I think mutex-debug.h also needs similar changes for completeness.
> >>
> >> Maybe, but given that with debug the wait_lock is unavoidable, doesn't
> >> this send the wrong message?
> >
> >The mutex_set_owner() and mutex_clear_owner() can still get called in
> >the fastpath without the wait_lock for the debug case too correct?
> 
> The fastpath is a nop, see mutex-null:
> 
> #define __mutex_fastpath_lock(count, fail_fn)		fail_fn(count)

Oh right, so then the mutex_set_owner() call in mutex_lock() doesn't
really matter. I'll update the patch to remove the use of WRITE_ONCE for
the debug case then, and add the comments about why it is different as
suggested.

Thanks,
Jason