Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:51:52 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, xcllnt@mac.com, attilio@freebsd.org, marcel@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r202889 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <201001261551.52206.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100126.130932.722022410132669562.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <3bbf2fe11001260058i65604619l664bd0e49c1dbbd@mail.gmail.com> <C6A8F7A7-F0A9-4F63-B61E-DDC5332DC495@mac.com> <20100126.130932.722022410132669562.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 26 January 2010 3:09:32 pm M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <C6A8F7A7-F0A9-4F63-B61E-DDC5332DC495@mac.com>
> Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> writes:
> : Maybe what is in order right now is a description (using pseudo
> : code if you like) of what exactly needs to happen with the 3rd
> : argument, when and how (i.e. what must be atomic and what does
> : not have to be atomic).
>
> I believe the proper pseudo code should be:
>
> cpu_switch(struct thread *old, struct thread *new, struct mutext *mtx)
> {
> /* Save the registers to the pcb */
> old->td_lock = mtx;
> #if defined(SMP) && defined(SCHED_ULE)
> /* s/long/int/ if sizeof(long) != sizeof(void *) */
> /* as we have no 'void *' version of the atomics */
> while (atomic_load_acq_long(&new->td_lock) == (long)&blocked_lock)
> continue;
> #endif
> /* Switch to new context */
> }
FYI, that is what the '_ptr' variants of atomic ops are for. I do think that
the 'acq' membar on the load is needed to ensure the CPU doesn't try to
speculatively read any of the 'new' thread's PCB until it sees the update to
td_lock.
--
John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201001261551.52206.jhb>