| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: anole: assorted stability problems |
| Date: | 2015-06-30 02:11:33 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZHQDbr4iQRcMJ1LcazdGC36VhwqZFQxiNb6BCUghXZrw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-06-29 00:42:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> #define S_UNLOCK(lock) \
>> do { _Asm_sched_fence(); (*(lock)) = 0; } while (0)
>
> Robert, how did you choose that? Isn't _Asm_sched_fence just a compiler
> barrier? Shouldn't this be a _Asm_mf()?
The point of the commit was to make spinlocks act as compiler barriers
as well as CPU barriers. So I was just looking to add a compiler
barrier to what was already there.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-06-30 02:32:03 | Re: anole: assorted stability problems |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-06-30 00:55:39 | Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice |