[PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jiri Olsa
Date: Friday, July 3, 2009 - 1:14 am

Adding smp_mb__after_lock define to be used as a smp_mb call after
a lock.  

Making it nop for x86, since {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are 
full memory barriers.

wbr,
jirka


Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>

---
 arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h |    3 +++
 include/linux/spinlock.h        |    5 +++++
 include/net/sock.h              |    5 ++++-
 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
index b7e5db8..39ecc5f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
@@ -302,4 +302,7 @@ static inline void __raw_write_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
 #define _raw_read_relax(lock)	cpu_relax()
 #define _raw_write_relax(lock)	cpu_relax()
 
+/* The {read|write|spin}_lock() on x86 are full memory barriers. */
+#define smp_mb__after_lock() do { } while (0)
+
 #endif /* _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H */
diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
index 252b245..ae053bd 100644
--- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
+++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
@@ -132,6 +132,11 @@ do {								\
 #endif /*__raw_spin_is_contended*/
 #endif
 
+/* The lock does not imply full memory barrier. */
+#ifndef smp_mb__after_lock
+#define smp_mb__after_lock() smp_mb()
+#endif
+
 /**
  * spin_unlock_wait - wait until the spinlock gets unlocked
  * @lock: the spinlock in question.
diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
index 4eb8409..98afcd9 100644
--- a/include/net/sock.h
+++ b/include/net/sock.h
@@ -1271,6 +1271,9 @@ static inline int sk_has_allocations(const struct sock *sk)
  * in its cache, and so does the tp->rcv_nxt update on CPU2 side.  The CPU1
  * could then endup calling schedule and sleep forever if there are no more
  * data on the socket.
+ *
+ * The sk_has_helper is always called right after a call to read_lock, so we
+ * can use smp_mb__after_lock barrier.
  */
 static inline int sk_has_sleeper(struct sock *sk)
 {
@@ -1280,7 +1283,7 @@ static inline int sk_has_sleeper(struct sock *sk)
 	 *
 	 * This memory barrier is paired in the sock_poll_wait.
 	 */
-	smp_mb();
+	smp_mb__after_lock();
 	return sk->sk_sleep && waitqueue_active(sk->sk_sleep);
 }
 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCHv5 0/2] net: fix race in the receive/select, Jiri Olsa, (Fri Jul 3, 1:12 am)
[PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Jiri Olsa, (Fri Jul 3, 1:14 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Fri Jul 3, 7:04 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Fri Jul 3, 8:40 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Fri Jul 3, 8:47 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Paul E. McKenney, (Fri Jul 3, 10:06 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Fri Jul 3, 10:31 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 7:01 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 7:57 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 8:04 am)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 12:45 pm)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 4:28 pm)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Jul 7, 9:34 pm)
Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] memory barrier: adding smp_mb__after_lock, Jarek Poplawski, (Wed Jul 8, 12:18 am)