From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
1vier1@web.de, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4 V4] Clarify/standardize memory barriers for lock/unlock
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 15:34:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1472477669-27508-1-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com> (raw)
Hi,
V4: Docu/comment improvements, remove unnecessary barrier for x86.
V3: Bugfix for arm64
V2: Include updated documentation for rcutree patch
As discussed before:
If a high-scalability locking scheme is built with multiple
spinlocks, then often additional memory barriers are required.
The documentation was not as clear as possible, and memory
barriers were missing / superfluous in the implementation.
Patch 1: Documentation, define one standard barrier, update ipc/sem.c
Patch 2: Update rcutree
Patch 3: Update nf_conntrack
Patch 4: Update for qspinlock: smp_mb__after_spin_lock is free.
Patch 3 is larger than required, it rewrites the conntrack logic
with the code from ipc/sem.c. I think the new code is simpler
and more realtime-friendly.
Please review!
@Andrew: The patches are relative to mmots.
Could you include them in your tree, with the target of including in
linux-next?
--
Manfred
next reply other threads:[~2016-08-29 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-29 13:34 Manfred Spraul [this message]
2016-08-29 13:34 ` [PATCH 1/4 v4] spinlock: Document memory barrier rules Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 17:38 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-08-29 13:34 ` [PATCH 2/4 V4] spinlock.h: Move smp_mb__after_unlock_lock to spinlock.h Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 13:34 ` [PATCH 3/4 V4] net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core: update memory barriers Manfred Spraul
2016-08-29 13:34 ` [PATCH 4/4 V4] qspinlock for x86: smp_mb__after_spin_lock() is free Manfred Spraul
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=1472477669-27508-1-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=1vier1@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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