Re: [PATCH RFC] percpu: add data dependency barrier in percpu accessors and operations

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Christoph.

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:56:10AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Uhhh no. The percpu stuff and the associated per cpu atomics are to be
> used for stuff that is per cpu specific and runs at the fastest speed
> doable at that level. Introducing implicit barriers is not that good an
> idea.

Hmmm?  Read barriers are noops on all archs except for alpha and
percpu pointer assignments aren't exactly a high frequency operation
and I'm pretty sure we'll end up with a raw variant anyway.

> The concurrency guarantees for the per cpu operations are related to being
> interrupted or rescheduled but not for accesses from other processors.
> 
> Cpus maintain at least the appearance of operations being visible in
> sequence for code running on the same processor. Therefore no barriers are
> needed.

Huh?  We're talking about percpu *pointer* assignments not assignments
to percpu areas.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/