On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:49:50PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:25:15AM -0400, Daniel Jordan wrote: > > > > Which memory barrier do you mean? I think you're referring to the one that > > atomic_inc might provide? If so, the memory model maintainers can correct > > me > > here, but my understanding is that RMW atomic ops that don't return values > > are > > unordered, so switching the lines has no effect. > > > > Besides, the smp_mb__after_atomic is what orders the list insertion with the > > trylock of pd->lock. > > The primitive smp_mb__after_atomic only provides a barrier when > used in conjunction with atomic_inc (and similar atomic ops). > > The actual barrier may either be in smp_mb__after_atomic or the > atomic op itself (which is the case on x86). Since we need the > barrier to occur after the list insertion we must move both of > these after the list_add_tail.
Yes, my mistake! Thanks for clarifying that.
