[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171011125636.GX3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 05:56:36 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, tj@...nel.org,
cl@...ux.com, davem@...emloft.net, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
corbet@....net, james.l.morris@...cle.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/15] Remove to-be-unneeded
smp_read_barrier_depends()
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 01:21:03PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Will Deacon has proposed adding smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE(),
> > which would mean that quite a few instances of smp_read_barrier_depends()
> > would become redundant.
>
> It's not clear from you description where the barrier is added in relation to
> the read: before, after or both?
After, similar to lockless_dereference(). Of course, there is not
really a barrier except for on Alpha.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists