Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1564754 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2017-01-23 09:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-01-24 03:50 +0100

#1564754 — Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering

"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 11:54:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
>> > > + */
>> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC
>> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	smp_mb()  /* Full ordering for lock. */
>> > > +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
>> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	do { } while (0)
>> > > +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
>> > 
>> > Yeah, so I realize that this was pre-existing code, but putting CONFIG_$ARCH
>> > #ifdefs into generic headers is generally frowned upon.
>> > 
>> > The canonical approach would be either to define a helper Kconfig variable that 
>> > can be set by PPC (but other architectures don't need to set it), or to expose a 
>> > suitable macro (function) for architectures to define in their barrier.h arch 
>> > header file.
>> 
>> Very well, I will add a separate commit for this.  4.11 OK?
>
> Does the patch below seem reasonable?
>
> 							Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit 271c0601237c41a279f975563e13837bace0df03
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date:   Sat Jan 14 13:32:50 2017 -0800
>
>     rcu: Make arch select smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() strength
>     
>     The definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() is currently smp_mb()
>     for CONFIG_PPC and a no-op otherwise.  It would be better to instead
>     provide an architecture-selectable Kconfig option, and select the
>     strength of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() based on that option.  This
>     commit therefore creates CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ, has PPC select it,
>     and bases the definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() on this new
>     CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ Kconfig option.
>     
>     Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
>     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>     Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>     Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>     Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
>     Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
>     Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
>     Cc: <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>

Personally I'd call it ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE, which is longer but
clearer I think. But it's not a big deal, so which ever you prefer.

Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

cheers

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1565453

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 07:12:03PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 11:54:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > [ . . . ]
> >
> >> > > + */
> >> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC
> >> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	smp_mb()  /* Full ordering for lock. */
> >> > > +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> >> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	do { } while (0)
> >> > > +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> >> > 
> >> > Yeah, so I realize that this was pre-existing code, but putting CONFIG_$ARCH
> >> > #ifdefs into generic headers is generally frowned upon.
> >> > 
> >> > The canonical approach would be either to define a helper Kconfig variable that 
> >> > can be set by PPC (but other architectures don't need to set it), or to expose a 
> >> > suitable macro (function) for architectures to define in their barrier.h arch 
> >> > header file.
> >> 
> >> Very well, I will add a separate commit for this.  4.11 OK?
> >
> > Does the patch below seem reasonable?
> >
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > commit 271c0601237c41a279f975563e13837bace0df03
> > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Date:   Sat Jan 14 13:32:50 2017 -0800
> >
> >     rcu: Make arch select smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() strength
> >     
> >     The definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() is currently smp_mb()
> >     for CONFIG_PPC and a no-op otherwise.  It would be better to instead
> >     provide an architecture-selectable Kconfig option, and select the
> >     strength of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() based on that option.  This
> >     commit therefore creates CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ, has PPC select it,
> >     and bases the definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() on this new
> >     CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ Kconfig option.
> >     
> >     Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >     Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >     Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> >     Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >     Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> >     Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
> >     Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> >     Cc: <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
> 
> Personally I'd call it ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE, which is longer but
> clearer I think. But it's not a big deal, so which ever you prefer.

ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE it is!

> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

Applied, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web