From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overlay filesystem v25 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 01:12:14 +0000 Message-ID: <20141028011214.GZ7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20141024022055.GH7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141024032422.GI7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141025081845.GJ7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141025170609.GK7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141027155901.GE5718@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20141027172800.GW7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141027173621.GG5718@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Miklos Szeredi , Linus Torvalds , Linux-Fsdevel , Kernel Mailing List , linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org To: "Paul E. McKenney" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141027173621.GG5718@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-unionfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:36:21AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Code making direct use of smp_read_barrier_depends() is harder to read, > in my experience, but good point on the sparse noise. Maybe a new > lockless_dereference() primitive? Maybe something like the following? > (Untested, probably does not even build.) > > #define lockless_dereference(p) \ > ({ \ > typeof(*p) *_________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \ > smp_read_barrier_depends(); /* Dependency order vs. p above. */ \ > _________p1; \ > }) Hmm... Where would you prefer to put it? rcupdate.h?