From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
Cc: 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, peterz@infradead.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com,
sbw@mit.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: ACCESS_ONCE() provides cache coherence
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:52:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140217225253.GM4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140217214056.GB7941@thin>
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 01:40:56PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 01:26:49PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > The ACCESS_ONCE() primitive provides cache coherence, but the
> > documentation does not clearly state this. This commit therefore upgrades
> > the documentation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Punctuation nit below; otherwise:
> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
>
> > Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > index 102dc19c4119..ad6db1d48f1f 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > @@ -1249,6 +1249,23 @@ The ACCESS_ONCE() function can prevent any number of optimizations that,
> > while perfectly safe in single-threaded code, can be fatal in concurrent
> > code. Here are some examples of these sorts of optimizations:
> >
> > + (*) The compiler is within its rights to reorder loads and stores
> > + to the same variable, and in some cases, the CPU is within its
> > + rights to reorder loads to the same variable. This means that
> > + the following code:
> > +
> > + a[0] = x;
> > + a[1] = x;
> > +
> > + Might result in an older value of x stored in a[1] than in a[0].
> > + Prevent both the compiler and the CPU from doing this as follows:
> > +
> > + a[0] = ACCESS_ONCE(x);
> > + a[1] = ACCESS_ONCE(x);
> > +
> > + In short, ACCESS_ONCE() provides "cache coherence" for accesses from
> > + multiple CPUs to a single variable.
>
> You don't need to "quote" the well-established term "cache coherence".
Good point, fixed and applied your Reviewed-by, thank you!
Thanx, Paul
> > (*) The compiler is within its rights to merge successive loads from
> > the same variable. Such merging can cause the compiler to "optimize"
> > the following code:
> > --
> > 1.8.1.5
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-17 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-17 21:26 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/6] Documentation changes for 3.15 Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/6] documentation: Document call_rcu() safety mechanisms and limitations Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: ACCESS_ONCE() provides cache coherence Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:40 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:52 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Conditional must use prior load Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/6] Documentation/kernel-per-CPU-kthreads.txt: Workqueue affinity Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Need barriers() for some control dependencies Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:46 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 0:02 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 0:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 0:45 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-18 3:29 ` Josh Triplett
2014-02-18 4:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:26 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 6/6] documentation: Fix some inconsistencies in RTFP.txt Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:39 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/6] documentation: Document call_rcu() safety mechanisms and limitations Josh Triplett
2014-02-17 22:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-17 21:47 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/6] Documentation changes for 3.15 Josh Triplett
[not found] <1392672413-5114-2-git-send-email-paulmck () linux ! vnet ! ibm ! com>
2020-04-24 3:36 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/6] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: ACCESS_ONCE() provides cache coherence Jon Masters
2020-04-27 22:59 ` 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=20140217225253.GM4250@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@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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