From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
sbw@mit.edu, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 8/9] rcu: Simplify _rcu_barrier() processing
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:42:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1376966534-30775-8-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1376966534-30775-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
This commit drops an unneeded ACCESS_ONCE() and simplifies an "our work
is done" check in _rcu_barrier(). This applies feedback from Linus
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/26/777) that he gave to similar code
in an unrelated patch.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
---
kernel/rcutree.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
index c6a064a..612aff1 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
@@ -2817,9 +2817,20 @@ static void _rcu_barrier(struct rcu_state *rsp)
* transition. The "if" expression below therefore rounds the old
* value up to the next even number and adds two before comparing.
*/
- snap_done = ACCESS_ONCE(rsp->n_barrier_done);
+ snap_done = rsp->n_barrier_done;
_rcu_barrier_trace(rsp, "Check", -1, snap_done);
- if (ULONG_CMP_GE(snap_done, ((snap + 1) & ~0x1) + 2)) {
+
+ /*
+ * If the value in snap is odd, we needed to wait for the current
+ * rcu_barrier() to complete, then wait for the next one, in other
+ * words, we need the value of snap_done to be three larger than
+ * the value of snap. On the other hand, if the value in snap is
+ * even, we only had to wait for the next rcu_barrier() to complete,
+ * in other words, we need the value of snap_done to be only two
+ * greater than the value of snap. The "(snap + 3) & 0x1" computes
+ * this for us (thank you, Linus!).
+ */
+ if (ULONG_CMP_GE(snap_done, (snap + 3) & ~0x1)) {
_rcu_barrier_trace(rsp, "EarlyExit", -1, snap_done);
smp_mb(); /* caller's subsequent code after above check. */
mutex_unlock(&rsp->barrier_mutex);
--
1.8.1.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-20 2:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-20 2:41 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/9] v2 Fixes for 3.12 Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/9] rcu: Expedite grace periods during suspend/resume Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/9] rcu: Simplify debug-objects fixups Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/9] debugobjects: Make debug_object_activate() return status Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/9] rcu: Make call_rcu() leak callbacks for debug-object errors Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/9] rcu: Avoid redundant grace-period kthread wakeups Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/9] rculist: list_first_or_null_rcu() should use list_entry_rcu() Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 7/9] rcu: Select IRQ_WORK from TREE_PREEMPT_RCU Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-08-20 9:48 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 8/9] rcu: Simplify _rcu_barrier() processing Lai Jiangshan
2013-08-20 18:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 2:42 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 9/9] jiffies: Avoid undefined behavior from signed overflow Paul E. McKenney
2013-08-20 9:58 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/9] rcu: Expedite grace periods during suspend/resume Lai Jiangshan
2013-08-20 18:42 ` 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=1376966534-30775-8-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.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@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).