linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
	dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com,
	will.deacon@arm.com, boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 08:57:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170115075711.GA19506@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170115074034.GE5238@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 08:11:23AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > index 357b32aaea48..5fdfe874229e 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> > > @@ -1175,11 +1175,11 @@ do { \
> > >   * if the UNLOCK and LOCK are executed by the same CPU or if the
> > >   * UNLOCK and LOCK operate on the same lock variable.
> > >   */
> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ
> > >  #define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	smp_mb()  /* Full ordering for lock. */
> > > -#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> > > +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ */
> > >  #define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	do { } while (0)
> > > -#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> > > +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ */
> > >  
> > >  
> > 
> > So at the risk of sounding totally pedantic, why not structure it like the 
> > existing smp_mb__before/after*() primitives in barrier.h?
> > 
> > That allows asm-generic/barrier.h to pick up the definition - for example in the 
> > case of smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() we do:
> > 
> >  #ifndef smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep
> >  #define smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep()           smp_rmb()
> >  #endif
> > 
> > Which allows Tile to relax it:
> > 
> >   arch/tile/include/asm/barrier.h:#define smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep()   barrier()
> > 
> > I.e. I'd move the API definition out of rcupdate.h and into barrier.h - even 
> > though tree-RCU is the only user of this barrier type.
> 
> I wouldn't have any problem with that, however, some time back it was
> moved into RCU because (you guessed it!) RCU is the only user.  ;-)

Indeed ...

[sounds of rummaging around in the Git tree]

I found this commit of yours from ancient history (more than a year ago!):

  commit 12d560f4ea87030667438a169912380be00cea4b
  Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
  Date:   Tue Jul 14 18:35:23 2015 -0700

    rcu,locking: Privatize smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()
    
    RCU is the only thing that uses smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), and is
    likely the only thing that ever will use it, so this commit makes this
    macro private to RCU.
    
    Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
    Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
    Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
    Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>

So I concur and I'm fine with your patch - or with the status quo code as well.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-15  7:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-14  9:19 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/3] SRCU updates for 4.11 Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-14  9:19 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] srcu: More efficient reader counts Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-14  9:31   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-14 19:48     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-14  9:20 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-14  9:35   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-14 19:54     ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-14 21:41       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15  7:11         ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-15  7:40           ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15  7:57             ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2017-01-15  9:24               ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15  9:40                 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-15 19:45                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-16  6:56                     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-23  8:12         ` Michael Ellerman
2017-01-24  2:45           ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15  6:54       ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-14  9:20 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/3] rcutorture: Add CBMC-based formal verification for SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15 22:41 ` [PATCH tip/core/rcu v2 0/3] SRCU updates for 4.11 Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15 22:42   ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 1/3] srcu: Implement more-efficient reader counts Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-23 20:17     ` Lance Roy
2017-01-23 20:17       ` [PATCH] SRCU: More efficient " Lance Roy
2017-01-23 20:35         ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-23 21:33           ` Lance Roy
2017-01-23 21:35             ` [PATCH] srcu: Implement more-efficient " Lance Roy
2017-01-24  0:42               ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24  0:53                 ` Lance Roy
2017-01-24  1:57                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24  3:26                     ` Lance Roy
2017-01-24 17:07                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-15 22:42   ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-23  8:38     ` Lance Roy
2017-01-23 19:12       ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-23 20:06         ` Lance Roy
2017-01-15 22:42   ` [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 3/3] rcutorture: Add CBMC-based formal verification for SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24 22:00   ` [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 0/4] SRCU updates for 4.11 Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24 22:00     ` [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 1/4] srcu: Implement more-efficient reader counts Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-25 18:17       ` Lance Roy
2017-01-25 21:03         ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24 22:00     ` [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 2/4] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24 22:00     ` [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 3/4] rcutorture: Add CBMC-based formal verification for SRCU Paul E. McKenney
2017-01-24 22:00     ` [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 4/4] srcu: Reduce probability of SRCU ->unlock_count[] counter overflow 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=20170115075711.GA19506@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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).