Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
From: Boqun Feng
Date: Tue Jan 26 2016 - 11:52:55 EST
Hi Paul,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 07:46:29AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 04:19:29PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > You could use SYNC_ACQUIRE() to implement read_barrier_depends() and
> > > smp_read_barrier_depends(), but SYNC_RMB probably does not suffice.
> > > The reason for this is that smp_read_barrier_depends() must order the
> > > pointer load against any subsequent read or write through a dereference
> > > of that pointer. For example:
> > >
> > > p = READ_ONCE(gp);
> > > smp_rmb();
> > > r1 = p->a; /* ordered by smp_rmb(). */
> > > p->b = 42; /* NOT ordered by smp_rmb(), BUG!!! */
> > > r2 = x; /* ordered by smp_rmb(), but doesn't need to be. */
> > >
> > > In contrast:
> > >
> > > p = READ_ONCE(gp);
> > > smp_read_barrier_depends();
> > > r1 = p->a; /* ordered by smp_read_barrier_depends(). */
> > > p->b = 42; /* ordered by smp_read_barrier_depends(). */
> > > r2 = x; /* not ordered by smp_read_barrier_depends(), which is OK. */
> > >
> > > Again, if your hardware maintains local ordering for address
> > > and data dependencies, you can have read_barrier_depends() and
> > > smp_read_barrier_depends() be no-ops like they are for most
> > > architectures.
> > >
> > > Does that help?
> >
> > This is crazy! smp_rmb started out being strictly stronger than
> > smp_read_barrier_depends, when did this stop being the case?
>
> Hello, Herbert!
>
> It is true that most Linux kernel code relies only on the read-read
> properties of dependencies, but the read-write properties are useful.
> Admittedly relatively rarely, but useful.
>
> The better comparison for smp_read_barrier_depends(), especially in
> its rcu_dereference*() form, is smp_load_acquire().
>
Confused..
I recall that last time you and Linus came into a conclusion that even
on Alpha, a barrier for read->write with data dependency is unnecessary:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2077661
And in an earlier mail of that thread, Linus made his point that
smp_read_barrier_depends() should only be used to order read->read.
So right now, are we going to extend the semantics of
smp_read_barrier_depends()? Can we just make smp_read_barrier_depends()
still only work for read->read, and assume all the architectures won't
reorder read->write with data dependency, so that the code above having
a smp_rmb() also works?
Regards,
Boqun
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature