[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161125161709.GQ3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 17:17:09 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, dbueso@...e.de,
jasowang@...hat.com, KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] virtio/vringh: kill off ACCESS_ONCE()
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 04:10:04PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 04:21:39PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > What are use cases for such primitive that won't be OK with "read once
> > _and_ atomically"?
>
> I have none to hand.
Whatever triggers the __builtin_memcpy() paths, and even the size==8
paths on 32bit.
You could put a WARN in there to easily find them.
The advantage of introducing the SINGLE_{LOAD,STORE}() helpers is that
they compiletime validate this the size is 'right' and can runtime check
alignment constraints.
IE, they are strictly stronger than {READ,WRITE}_ONCE().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists