[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YBLQ9hbj8Zafjz+c@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:57:58 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...ia.com>
Cc: Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] MIPS: Octeon: Implement __smp_store_release()
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 12:52:22PM +0100, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> On 28/01/2021 12:33, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > This, from commit 6b07d38aaa52 ("MIPS: Octeon: Use optimized memory
> > barrier primitives."):
> >
> > #define smp_mb__before_llsc() smp_wmb()
> > #define __smp_mb__before_llsc() __smp_wmb()
> >
> > is also dodgy as hell and really wants a comment too. I'm not buying the
> > Changelog of that commit either, __smp_mb__before_llsc should also
> > ensure the LL cannot happen earlier, but SYNCW has no effect on loads.
> > So what stops the load from being speculated?
>
> hmm, the commit message you point to above, says:
>
> "Since Octeon does not do speculative reads, this functions as a full barrier."
So then the only difference between SYNC and SYNCW is a pipeline drain?
I still worry about the transitivity thing.. ISTR that being a sticky
point back then too.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists