From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org,
dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 05/14] rcu: Abstract sequence counting from synchronize_sched_expedited()
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 11:42:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150709083809.GA14145@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150701221804.GW3717@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 03:18:04PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > +/* Adjust sequence number for start of update-side operation. */
> > > +static void rcu_seq_start(unsigned long *sp)
> > > +{
> > > + WRITE_ONCE(*sp, *sp + 1);
> > > + smp_mb(); /* Ensure update-side operation after counter increment. */
> > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!(*sp & 0x1));
> > > +}
> >
> > That wants to be an ACQUIRE, right?
>
> I cannot put the acquire in the WARN_ON_ONCE() because there
> are configurations where WARN_ON_ONCE() is compiled out.
I think WARN_ON_ONCE() always evaulates the condition. You are maybe
thinking of VM_WARN_ON_ONCE().
I'm on a different thread where we almost introduced a bug by using
VM_WARN_ONCE() instead of WARN_ONCE(). The VM_WARNING conditions had
long execute times so they are weird.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-09 8:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-30 22:25 [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/14] Rework expedited grace periods Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 01/14] rcu: Switch synchronize_sched_expedited() to stop_one_cpu() Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 02/14] rcu: Rework synchronize_rcu_expedited() counter handling Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 03/14] rcu: Get rid of synchronize_sched_expedited()'s polling loop Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 04/14] rcu: Make expedited GP CPU stoppage asynchronous Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 05/14] rcu: Abstract sequence counting from synchronize_sched_expedited() Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 22:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 8:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-02 14:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-09 8:42 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2015-07-09 14:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 06/14] rcu: Make synchronize_rcu_expedited() use sequence-counter scheme Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 07/14] rcu: Abstract funnel locking from synchronize_sched_expedited() Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 08/14] rcu: Fix synchronize_sched_expedited() type error for "s" Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 09/14] rcu: Use funnel locking for synchronize_rcu_expedited()'s polling loop Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 10/14] rcu: Apply rcu_seq operations to _rcu_barrier() Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 11/14] rcu: Consolidate last open-coded expedited memory barrier Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 12/14] rcu: Extend expedited funnel locking to rcu_data structure Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 13/14] rcu: Add stall warnings to synchronize_sched_expedited() Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:25 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 14/14] documentation: Describe new expedited stall warnings Paul E. McKenney
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=20150709083809.GA14145@mwanda \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.