[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1066702992.9268.1627497574534.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:39:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: paulmck <paulmck@...nel.org>, rcu <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
fweisbec <fweisbec@...il.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Joel Fernandes, Google" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 rcu 04/18] rcu: Weaken ->dynticks accesses and
updates
----- On Jul 28, 2021, at 2:32 PM, Linus Torvalds torvalds@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 11:12 AM Mathieu Desnoyers
> <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
>>
>> Are the percpu atomics you have in mind different from what is found in
>> Documentation/core-api/this_cpu_ops.rst ?
>>
>> Namely this_cpu_add_return(pcp, val) in this case.
>
> Nope.
>
> Those are only "CPU-atomic", ie atomic wrt interrupts etc.
>
> The RCU code wants SMP-atomic, and it's mainly that we *could* do the
> addressing more efficiently.
OK, so combining the addressing tricks of this_cpu operations with
smp-atomic operations (e.g. LOCK prefix on x86). It may indeed become
worthwhile given enough users, and fast enough atomic operations.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists