From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Biggers Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/memory-model: document the "one-time init" pattern Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:02:47 -0700 Message-ID: <20200718010247.GC2183@sol.localdomain> References: <20200717044427.68747-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200717174750.GQ12769@casper.infradead.org> <20200717175138.GB1156312@rowland.harvard.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:46124 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726742AbgGRBCt (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 21:02:49 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200717175138.GB1156312@rowland.harvard.edu> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Stern Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E . McKenney" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Andrea Parri , Boqun Feng , Daniel Lustig , "Darrick J . Wong" , Dave Chinner , David Howells , Jade Alglave , Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 01:51:38PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 06:47:50PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 09:44:27PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > ... > > > + /* on success, pairs with smp_load_acquire() above and below */ > > > + if (cmpxchg_release(&foo, NULL, p) != NULL) { > > > > Why do we have cmpxchg_release() anyway? Under what circumstances is > > cmpxchg() useful _without_ having release semantics? > > To answer just the last question: cmpxchg() is useful for lock > acquisition, in which case it needs to have acquire semantics rather > than release semantics. > To clarify, there are 4 versions of cmpxchg: cmpxchg(): does ACQUIRE and RELEASE (on success) cmpxchg_acquire(): does ACQUIRE only (on success) cmpxchg_release(): does RELEASE only (on success) cmpxchg_relaxed(): no barriers The problem here is that here we need RELEASE on success and ACQUIRE on failure. But no version guarantees any barrier on failure. So as far as I can tell, the best we can do is use cmpxchg_release() (or cmpxchg() which would be stronger but unnecessary), followed by a separate ACQUIRE on failure. - Eric