[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1297707868.5226.189.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:24:28 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, sam@...nborg.org,
ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
dhowells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"heiko.carstens" <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
benh <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 17:50 +0000, Will Newton wrote:
>
> It would observe a stale value, but that value would only be updated
> when the cache line was reloaded from main memory which would have to
> be triggered by either eviction or cache flushing. So it could get
> pretty stale. Whilst that's probably within the spec. of atomic_read I
> suspect it would lead to problems in practice. I could be wrong
> though.
Right, so the typical scenario that could cause pain is something like:
while (atomic_read(&foo) != n)
cpu_relax();
and the problem is that cpu_relax() doesn't know which particular
cacheline to flush in order to make things go faster, hm?
--
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