On Wed, 2015-07-22 at 16:12 -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > The smp_store_release() is not a full barrier. In order to avoid missed > wakeup, we may need to add memory barrier around locked and cpu state > variables adding to complexity. As the chance of spurious wakeup is very > low, it is easier and safer to just do an unconditional kick at unlock > time.
Although I guess if SPIN_THRESHOLD is ever enlarged, the chances of spurious wakeups would be greater. > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
