From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirsky <amluto@amacapital.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
williams@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] context_tracking: remove local_irq_save from __acct_update_integrals
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 13:18:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150427111842.GA4491@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <553B8DA9.3060600@surriel.com>
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 08:50:49AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 04/25/2015 05:43 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > ...the READ_ONCE() doesn't give you any guarantees about reading
> > tsk->acct_timexpd in an atomic way.
> > Well, actually you don't need atomic semantics, but only to make sure that
> > the read access happens with a single instruction, since you want to protect
> > against interrupts.
> > But still: if the size of acct_timexpd is 64 bit READ_ONCE() may still result
> > in two instructions on 32 bit architectures.
> > (or isn't there currently no 32 bit architecture with 64 bit cputime_t left?)
>
> Even if there is (maybe some ARM system?), can we even guarantee
> that a single instruction to read 64 bits exists on such a system?
I wouldn't bet on it. I can only talk for s390 and there is an instruction
available which would do that. But since s390 is now a 64 bit only architecture
it doesn't matter anyway.
For other architectures I'd say: no, you can't rely on that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-27 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-24 15:16 [PATCH v2] context_tracking: remove local_irq_save from __acct_update_integrals Rik van Riel
2015-04-25 9:43 ` Heiko Carstens
2015-04-25 12:50 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-27 11:18 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
2015-04-28 12:53 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-28 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150427111842.GA4491@osiris \
--to=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=amluto@amacapital.com \
--cc=fweisbec@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=williams@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.