[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171205191733.GQ3165@worktop.lehotels.local>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 20:17:33 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
oleg@...hat.com, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant
read_barrier_depends()
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:57:46PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I don't see WRITE_ONCE inserting any barriers, release or
> write.
Correct, never claimed there was.
Just saying that:
obj = READ_ONCE(*foo);
val = READ_ONCE(obj->val);
Never needs a barrier (except on Alpha and we want to make that go
away). Simply because a CPU needs to complete the load of @obj before it
can compute the address &obj->val. Thus the second load _must_ come
after the first load and we get LOAD-LOAD ordering.
Alpha messing that up is a royal pain, and Alpha not being an
active/living architecture is just not worth the pain of keeping this in
the generic model.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists