From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix race between sched_move_domain()
 and vcpu_wake()
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:49:00 +0200
Message-ID: <1381492140.5006.40.camel@Abyss.lan>
References: <1381426196-11392-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<5257D3D2.4020907@eu.citrix.com> <1381490132.5006.33.camel@Abyss.lan>
	<5257E1DB.8070002@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1137599908708363195=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <5257E1DB.8070002@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@ts.fujitsu.com>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

--===============1137599908708363195==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-hwqaKpjmmuZRkkP6PHeN"

--=-hwqaKpjmmuZRkkP6PHeN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On ven, 2013-10-11 at 12:32 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 11/10/13 12:15, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > On ven, 2013-10-11 at 11:32 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:

> >> But I think this patch is still not quite right: both v->processor and
> >> per_cpu(schedule_data, ...).schedule_lock may change under your feet; =
so
> >> you always need to do the lock in a loop, checking to make sure that y=
ou
> >> *still* have the right lock after you have actually grabbed it.
> >>
> > Which, if I'm not mistaken, we sort of get for free it we go Jan's way,
> > don't we?
>=20
> You mean, we could just call vcpu_schedule_lock..() instead of writing a=
=20
> bespoke loop code?  Sure, that's definitely an advantage.
>=20
Yes, provided we go Jan's way and have it return the lock.

That way, we'll have vcpu_schedule_lock() responsible for both finding
the proper lock, and doing it in the right way (with the loop, as you're
suggesting above), and returning it to the caller.

That would mean result in code that is both correct and looks better (no
per_cpu().schedule_lock in the caller), so it's a win win. :-)

Dario

--=20
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


--=-hwqaKpjmmuZRkkP6PHeN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAlJX5awACgkQk4XaBE3IOsSeigCfbzVnG8lv8zVeCdkBAKccgjBv
SrUAoI+xjXyKmNJq4eJOXX681w96JdDC
=ScEa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-hwqaKpjmmuZRkkP6PHeN--


--===============1137599908708363195==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

--===============1137599908708363195==--