[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101118084341.GA23766@linux-sh.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:43:41 +0900
From: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 1/2] lib, Make gen_pool memory allocator lockless
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 09:34:35AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 09:14 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 19:53 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 19:47 +0800, huang ying wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 10:18 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> cmpxchg has been used in that way by ftrace and perf for a long time. So
> > > > >> I agree to make it a requirement on future architecture ports.
> > > > >
> > > > > Neither mandate an architecture do this though, only that when an
> > > > > architecture wants to support either feature and has NMIs (not all archs
> > > > > have NMI equivalents) it has to be safe.
> > > >
> > > > So we can make sure cmpxchg can be used in lock-less code on
> > > > architectures with perf, irq_work or ftrace enabled?
> > >
> > > It had better, otherwise stuff is broken.
> >
> > Take a look at superh architecture cmpxchg implementation. It seems that
> > cmpxchg is implemented with special instruction if CONFIG_GUSA_RB=y or
> > CONFIG_CPU_SH4A=y, otherwise it is implemented with local_irq_save. Is
> > it possible that superh has not PMU support if CONFIG_GUSA_RB=n and
> > CONFIG_CPU_SH4A=n, so that perf work properly but no NMI safe cmpxchg in
> > that situation?
>
> Dunno, you forgot to CC the author of that code.. I've really no clue
> about SH.
At the moment it's only SH-4 and SH-4A CPUs that implement PMU support,
so all of these are covered by a theoretically NMI-safe cmpxchg
implementation. This is more by coincidence than design, though.
The only cause for concern really is SH-2A which supports hardware
breakpoints (and perf events by proxy) but doesn't contain a PMU, and
only uses an IRQs disabled cmpxchg for the moment. It also supports
ftrace. I suppose I'll need to come up with a hack for this case..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists