[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210531151049.GE9324@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 23:10:49 +0800
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] perf auxtrace: Optimize barriers with
load-acquire and store-release
Hi Peter, Adrian,
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 10:03:19PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> Load-acquire and store-release are one-way permeable barriers, which can
> be used to guarantee the memory ordering between accessing the buffer
> data and the buffer's head / tail.
>
> This patch optimizes the memory ordering with the load-acquire and
> store-release barriers.
Is this patch okay for you?
Besides this patch, I have an extra question. You could see for
accessing the AUX buffer's head and tail, it also support to use
compiler build-in functions for atomicity accessing:
__sync_val_compare_and_swap()
__sync_bool_compare_and_swap()
Since now we have READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE(), do you think we still need
to support __sync_xxx_compare_and_swap() atomicity?
I checked the code for updating head and tail for the perf ring buffer
(see ring_buffer_read_head() and ring_buffer_write_tail() in the file
tools/include/linux/ring_buffer.h), which doesn't support
__sync_xxx_compare_and_swap() anymore. This is why I wander if should
drop __sync_xxx_compare_and_swap() atomicity for AUX ring buffer as
well.
Thanks,
Leo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists