From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755227AbZBRSp2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:45:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752527AbZBRSpS (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:45:18 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:3059 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752014AbZBRSpQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:45:16 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,230,1233561600"; d="scan'208";a="111959359" Subject: Re: smp.c && barriers (Was: [PATCH 1/4] generic-smp: remove single ipi fallback for smp_call_function_many()) From: Suresh Siddha Reply-To: Suresh Siddha To: Nick Piggin Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Oleg Nesterov , Jens Axboe , Linus Torvalds , "Paul E. McKenney" , Ingo Molnar , Rusty Russell , Steven Rostedt , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <20090218135945.GC23125@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090216213205.GA9098@redhat.com> <1234820704.30178.396.camel@laptop> <20090216220214.GA10093@redhat.com> <1234823097.30178.406.camel@laptop> <20090216231946.GA12009@redhat.com> <1234862974.4744.31.camel@laptop> <20090217101130.GA8660@wotan.suse.de> <1234866453.4744.58.camel@laptop> <20090217112657.GE26402@wotan.suse.de> <1234923702.29823.7.camel@vayu> <20090218135945.GC23125@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Intel Corp Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:43:40 -0800 Message-Id: <1234982620.29823.22.camel@vayu> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 05:59 -0800, Nick Piggin wrote: > You're saying the problem is in generic_exec_single because I've > removed the smp_mb that inadvertently also serialises memory with > the x2apic on x86? yes. > > Indeed that could cause problems on some architectures which I > had hoped to avoid. So the patch is probably better off to first > add the smp_mb() to arch_send_call_function_xxx arch code, unless > it is immediately obvious or confirmed by arch maintainer that > such barrier is not required. For x2apic specific operations we should add the smp_mb() sequence. But we need to make sure that we don't end up doing it twice (once in generic code and another in arch code) for all the ipi paths. thanks, suresh