| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, greg(at)burd(dot)me |
| Subject: | Re: IO in wrong state on riscv64 |
| Date: | 2025-10-13 05:40:52 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLpP2T90M3eEPB95KfB4PtdfVnEUNH+aoRiXfSk-ODJkQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 13.10.2025 01:44, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2025 at 6:00 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Please find those attached (gdb "disass/m pgaio_io_update_state" misses
> >> the start of the function (but it's still disassembled below), so I
> >> decided to share the whole output).
> > Could you please also disassemble pgaio_io_reclaim()?
>
> Sure, the output of disass/m pgaio_io_reclaim is attached.
Thanks. All seems to have something plausible in the right places,
but I know nothing about RISC-V... hmm, what happens if you replace
pg_{read,write}_barrier() with pg_memory_barrier(), in those three
functions? And if it happens to help, perhaps you could try to figure
out which one(s) help? Not that it should be necessary but as a clue
or to rule out this line of enquiry... I guess that should generate
FENCE RW,RW, meaning wait for all preceding reads and writes to
complete and don't let any following reads or writes begin, but that's
just from googling...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2025-10-13 05:44:42 | Re: Add support for specifying tables in pg_createsubscriber. |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2025-10-13 05:39:41 | Re: Add RESPECT/IGNORE NULLS and FROM FIRST/LAST options |