[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150326170748.GD21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:07:48 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the access_once tree
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 09:45:07AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Stop this idiocy.
Yeah, clearly I can type faster than I can think straight :/
In any case, I've the below patch; do you want to take it now or do you
want me to route it through tip/locking/urgent or something like that?
---
Subject: kernel: Remove atomicy checks from {READ,WRITE}_ONCE
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:45:37 +0100
The fact that volatile allows for atomic load/stores is a special case
not a requirement for {READ,WRITE}_ONCE(). Their primary purpose is to
force the compiler to emit load/stores _once_.
So remove the warning as it is correct behaviour. This also implies that
the u64 case is not 64bit only, so remove the #ifdef so we can generate
better code in that case.
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
include/linux/compiler.h | 16 ----------------
1 file changed, 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 1b45e4a0519b..0e41ca0e5927 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -192,29 +192,16 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_branch_data *f, int val, int expect);
#include <uapi/linux/types.h>
-static __always_inline void data_access_exceeds_word_size(void)
-#ifdef __compiletime_warning
-__compiletime_warning("data access exceeds word size and won't be atomic")
-#endif
-;
-
-static __always_inline void data_access_exceeds_word_size(void)
-{
-}
-
static __always_inline void __read_once_size(const volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
{
switch (size) {
case 1: *(__u8 *)res = *(volatile __u8 *)p; break;
case 2: *(__u16 *)res = *(volatile __u16 *)p; break;
case 4: *(__u32 *)res = *(volatile __u32 *)p; break;
-#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
case 8: *(__u64 *)res = *(volatile __u64 *)p; break;
-#endif
default:
barrier();
__builtin_memcpy((void *)res, (const void *)p, size);
- data_access_exceeds_word_size();
barrier();
}
}
@@ -225,13 +212,10 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
-#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
-#endif
default:
barrier();
__builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
- data_access_exceeds_word_size();
barrier();
}
}
--
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