[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160609121603.GB30935@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 14:16:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Minfei Huang <mnghuan@...il.com>
Cc: bp@...e.de, pbonzini@...hat.com, luto@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 V2] pvclock: Get rid of __pvclock_read_cycles in
function pvclock_read_flags
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 08:27:43PM +0800, Minfei Huang wrote:
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pvclock.c
> @@ -61,11 +61,14 @@ void pvclock_resume(void)
> u8 pvclock_read_flags(struct pvclock_vcpu_time_info *src)
> {
> unsigned version;
> - cycle_t ret;
> u8 flags;
>
> do {
> - version = __pvclock_read_cycles(src, &ret, &flags);
> + version = src->version;
> + /* Make the latest version visible */
> + smp_rmb();
> +
> + flags = src->flags;
Using a seqcount to load a single byte is insane ;-)
> /* Make sure that the version double-check is last. */
> smp_rmb();
> } while ((src->version & 1) || version != src->version);
What's wrong with:
u8 flags = READ_ONCE(src->flags);
?
(and have the flags store be done using WRITE_ONCE() of course).
Sure, if your total state is larger than one word you need the
seqcount for integrity, but reading _one_ byte, shees.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists