lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 10:49:20 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> To: Praveen Kannoju <praveen.kannoju@...cle.com> Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, "rds-devel@....oracle.com" <rds-devel@....oracle.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rama Nichanamatlu <rama.nichanamatlu@...cle.com>, Rajesh Sivaramasubramaniom <rajesh.sivaramasubramaniom@...cle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rds: ib: Reduce the contention caused by the asynchronous workers to flush the mr pool On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 02:08:48PM +0000, Praveen Kannoju wrote: > From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:jgg@...pe.ca] > Sent: 19 January 2022 06:47 PM > To: Praveen Kannoju <praveen.kannoju@...cle.com> > Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>; Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>; David S . Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; kuba@...nel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org; rds-devel@....oracle.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Rama Nichanamatlu <rama.nichanamatlu@...cle.com>; Rajesh Sivaramasubramaniom <rajesh.sivaramasubramaniom@...cle.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rds: ib: Reduce the contention caused by the asynchronous workers to flush the mr pool > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 01:12:29PM +0000, Praveen Kannoju wrote: > > > Yes, we are using the barriers. I was justifying the usage of > > smp_rmb() and smp_wmb() over smp_load_acquire() and > > smp_store_release() in the patch. > > You failed to justify it. > > Jason > > Apologies, if my earlier point is not clear, Jason. > Let me reframe: > > 1. The introduced bool variable "flush_ongoing", is being accessed only in the function "rds_ib_free_mr" while spawning asynchronous workers. > > 2. The ordering guaranteed by smp_rmb() and smp_wmb() would be > sufficient for such simple usage and hence we did not use > smp_load_acquire() and smp_store_release(). Again you haven't defined why these barriers are any differnet from acquire/release or even *what they are doing* Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists