[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230301135201.59771b73@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 13:52:01 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: use try_cmpxchg in check_cpu_stall
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 19:43:34 +0100
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 5:38 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:28:47 +0100
> > Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > These benefits are the reason the change to try_cmpxchg was accepted
> > > also in the linear code elsewhere in the linux kernel, e.g. [2,3] to
> > > name a few commits, with a thumbs-up and a claim that the new code is
> > > actually *clearer* at the merge commit [4].
> >
> > I'll say it here too. I really like Joel's suggestion of having a
> > cmpxchg_success() that does not have the added side effect of modifying the
> > old variable.
> >
> > I think that would allow for the arch optimizations that you are trying to
> > achieve, as well as remove the side effect that might cause issues down the
> > road.
>
> Attached patch implements this suggestion.
I like it!
Anyway to make this more generic?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists