From: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org,
dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com,
fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 6/7] locking: Add an smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() for UNLOCK+LOCK barrier
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:45:08 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131210174508.GC10311@leaf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131210123726.GE13532@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 01:37:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 05:28:02PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> > index f89da808ce31..abf645799991 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> > @@ -84,4 +84,6 @@ do { \
> > ___p1; \
> > })
> >
> > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() do { } while (0)
> > +
> > #endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_BARRIER_H */
>
> Didn't ben said ppc actually violates the current unlock+lock assumtion
> and therefore this barrier woulnd't actually be a nop on ppc
Or, ppc could fix its lock primitives to preserve the unlock+lock
assumption, and avoid subtle breakage across half the kernel.
- Josh Triplett
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-10 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-10 1:27 [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking] Memory-barrier documentation updates + smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:27 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 1/7] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Add needed ACCESS_ONCE() calls to memory-barriers.txt Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:27 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 2/7] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Add long atomic examples " Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:27 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 3/7] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Prohibit speculative writes Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:28 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 4/7] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Document ACCESS_ONCE() Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:28 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 5/7] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Downgrade UNLOCK+LOCK Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:32 ` Josh Triplett
2013-12-10 5:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 13:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-10 17:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-10 17:43 ` Josh Triplett
2013-12-10 18:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-10 18:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 16:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-10 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-10 1:28 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 6/7] locking: Add an smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() for UNLOCK+LOCK barrier Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 1:34 ` Josh Triplett
2013-12-10 5:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 18:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-10 17:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:45 ` Josh Triplett [this message]
2013-12-10 20:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-10 17:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-10 17:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-12-10 1:28 ` [PATCH v5 tip/core/locking 7/7] rcu: Apply smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() to preserve grace periods 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=20131210174508.GC10311@leaf \
--to=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--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=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).