[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161125163220.GB30181@leverpostej>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:32:21 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
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 05:17:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 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.
Lockref, per:
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.3/02294.html
In that specific case, a torn value just means we'll retry until we get
a non torn value, due to the cmpxchg. For that case, all we need is the
value to be reloaded per invocation of READ_ONCE().
This guy seems to have the full story:
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.3/02389.html
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.3/02558.html
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists