[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230525085400.GP4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 10:54:00 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Kautuk Consul <kconsul@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
"Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
luto@...nel.org, jun.nakajima@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, david@...hat.com, aarcange@...hat.com,
ddutile@...hat.com, dhildenb@...hat.com,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>, mhocko@...e.com,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 08/14] KVM: Rename mmu_notifier_*
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 02:39:50PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 01:16:03PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Of course, the only accesses outside of mmu_lock are reads, so on x86 that
> > > "atomic" access is just a READ_ONCE() load, but that's not the case for all
> > > architectures.
> >
> > This is true on *all* archs. atomic_set() and atomic_read() are no more
> > and no less than WRITE_ONCE() / READ_ONCE().
>
> Ah, I take it s390's handcoded assembly routines are just a paranoid equivalents
> and not truly special? "l" and "st" do sound quite generic...
Yep, compiler *should* generate the same with READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists