public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:43:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150827124334.GY16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150827122727.GC27052@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 02:27:27PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
> I have just stumbled over the comment above wake_up_process which
> claims:
> "
>  * It may be assumed that this function implies a write memory barrier before
>  * changing the task state if and only if any tasks are woken up.
> "
> 
> but try_to_wake_up does smp_mb__before_spinlock and did smp_wmb
> since 04e2f1741d235 unconditionally. The comment was added when the
> smp_wmb was in place already so I am wondering whether the comment is
> wrong/misleading.
> 
> Could somebody clarify please?

Its true for wake_up(), since that bails early if the waitqueue list is
empty.

I suspect there was no exception made for wake_up_process() to simplify
the rules.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-27 12:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-27 12:27 wake_up_process implied memory barrier clarification Michal Hocko
2015-08-27 12:43 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-08-27 13:14   ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-27 18:26     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-28 14:51       ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-28 16:06         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-29  9:25           ` Boqun Feng
2015-08-29 14:27             ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-31  0:37               ` Boqun Feng
2015-08-31 18:33                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-31 20:37                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-09-01  3:40                     ` Boqun Feng
2015-09-01  4:03                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-09-01  9:59                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-01 14:50                         ` Boqun Feng
2015-09-01 16:39                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-02  1:10                             ` Boqun Feng
2015-09-07 17:06                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-08  0:22                                 ` Boqun Feng
2015-09-01  9:41                     ` Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150827124334.GY16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox