From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: zilin@seu.edu.cn, jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn, jlayton@kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netfs@lists.linux.dev, mjguzik@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/netfs: Remove redundant use of smp_rmb()
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 19:09:59 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9cc62b69-7cfb-477b-bec1-3bbcc49a310e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2011011.1733558696@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Hi David,
On Sat, 07 Dec 2024 08:04:56 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you sure removing the smp_rmb() is realy the right thing to do?
>
> The wait_on_bit*() class functions, e.g.:
>
> wait_on_bit(unsigned long *word, int bit, unsigned mode)
> {
> might_sleep();
> if (!test_bit_acquire(bit, word))
> return 0;
> return out_of_line_wait_on_bit(word, bit,
> bit_wait,
> mode);
> }
>
> now unconditionally includes an appropriate barrier on the test_bit(), so the
> smp_rmb() should be unnecessary, though netfslib should probably be using
> clear_and_wake_up_bit().
>
Thank you for clarifying.
> Probably we need to update the doc to reflect this.
Agreed.
I see that wait_on_bit()'s kernel-doc comment mentions implicit ACQUIRE
semantics on success, and that of wake_up_bit() mentions the need of care
for memory ordering before calling it.
Unfortunately, neither of those comments is included into kernel
documentation build (Sphinx) at the moment.
I'm going to prepare a patch for including them somewhere under the
core-api doc.
WRT memory-barriers.txt, I'm not sure I can update it properly.
David, may I ask you doing that part?
Thanks, Akira
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-07 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-07 2:19 [PATCH] fs/netfs: Remove redundant use of smp_rmb() Zilin Guan
2024-12-07 5:20 ` Akira Yokosawa
2024-12-07 8:04 ` David Howells
2024-12-07 10:09 ` Akira Yokosawa [this message]
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=9cc62b69-7cfb-477b-bec1-3bbcc49a310e@gmail.com \
--to=akiyks@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=netfs@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=zilin@seu.edu.cn \
/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).