Re: Question about barriers for ARM on tools/perf/

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 03:21:08PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to go the other way, and use compiler builtins for
> the memory barriers instead of relying on the kernel? It looks like the
> perf_mmap__{read,write}_head functions are basically just acquire/release
> operations and could therefore be implemented using something like
> __atomic_load_n(&pc->data_head, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) and
> __atomic_store_n(&pc->data_tail, tail, __ATOMIC_RELEASE).

He wants to do smp refcounting, which needs atomic_inc() /
atomic_inc_non_zero() / atomic_dec_return() etc..
--
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/