From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: compudj@krystal.dyndns.org (Mathieu Desnoyers)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 18:31:07 -0400
Subject: [ltt-dev] [URCU RFC patch 2/3] call_rcu: use futex for
	wakeup	scheme
In-Reply-To: <isn6u4$f1v$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <20110606174558.499172848@efficios.com>
	<20110606175029.073385695@efficios.com>
	<isn6u4$f1v$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP3919831E9C87EA8815511896620@phx.gbl>

* Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini at redhat.com) wrote:
> On 06/06/2011 07:46 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> +static void call_rcu_wait(struct call_rcu_data *crdp)
>> +{
>> +	/* Read call_rcu list before read futex */
>> +	cmm_smp_mb();
>> +	if (uatomic_read(&crdp->futex) == -1)
>> +		futex_async(&crdp->futex, FUTEX_WAIT, -1,
>> +		      NULL, NULL, 0);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void call_rcu_wake_up(struct call_rcu_data *crdp)
>> +{
>> +	/* Write to call_rcu list before reading/writing futex */
>> +	cmm_smp_mb();
>> +	if (unlikely(uatomic_read(&crdp->futex) == -1)) {
>> +		uatomic_set(&crdp->futex, 0);
>> +		futex_async(&crdp->futex, FUTEX_WAKE, 1,
>> +		      NULL, NULL, 0);
>> +	}
>> +}
>
> I don't see crdp->futex ever set to -1, am I missing something obvious?


Good catch! I missed those parts from the urcu.c wait/wakeup scheme
(decrement initially, and also set to 0 explicitely when breaking the
loop without waiting). I just added them with commit
c768e45ed336970a42e58e679804f0f455422cd8

Thanks!

Mathieu

>
> Paolo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com