Re: [PATCH -tip 2/3] sched/wake_q: Relax to acquire semantics

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > Secondly, the wake queues are not concurrent, they're in context, so I
> > don't see ordering matter at all. The only reason its a cmpxchg() is
> > because there is the (small) possibility of two contexts wanting to wake
> > the same task, and we use task_struct storage for the queue.
>
> I don't think we need _any_ barriers here, unless we have concurrent
> users of the wake queues (or want to allow any, do we?).

Exactly, the queues are not concurent and do not need barriers, but some of
our callers do expect them.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/