search for: __smp_mb__after_atomic

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:54:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 02, 2016 at 11:24:38AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > > My only concern is that it gives people an additional handle onto a

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:54:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 02, 2016 at 11:24:38AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > > My only concern is that it gives people an additional handle onto a

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't

Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh

Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh

...f > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > +#define fence() metag_fence() > +#else > +#define fence() do { } while (0) > #endif > > -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() > -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() > +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() > +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() > > #include <asm-generic/barrier.h> > > -- > MST > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundat...

...f > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > +#define fence() metag_fence() > +#else > +#define fence() do { } while (0) > #endif > > -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() > -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() > +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() > +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() > > #include <asm-generic/barrier.h> > > -- > MST > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundat...

Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the

Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the

...fine dma_rmb() mb() #define dma_wmb() mb() -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP -# define smp_mb() mb() -#else -# define smp_mb() barrier() -#endif +# define __smp_mb() mb() -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() /* * IA64 GCC turns volatile stores into st.rel and volatile loads into ld.acq no * need for asm trickery! */ -#define smp_store_release(p, v) \ +#define __smp_store_release(p, v) \ do { \ compiletime_assert_atomic_type(*p); \ barrier(); \ WR...

...\ ({ \ typeof(*p) ___p1 = READ_ONCE(*p); \ compiletime_assert_atomic_type(*p); \ @@ -52,8 +52,8 @@ do { \ ___p1; \ }) -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() #include <asm-generic/barrier.h> -- MST

...barrier() +#define __smp_wmb() barrier() #endif + +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP +#define fence() metag_fence() +#else +#define fence() do { } while (0) #endif -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() #include <asm-generic/barrier.h> -- MST

...EAD_ONCE(*p); \ compiletime_assert_atomic_type(*p); \ @@ -85,8 +78,8 @@ do { \ #endif /* Atomic operations are already serializing on x86 */ -#define smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() -#define smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__before_atomic() barrier() +#define __smp_mb__after_atomic() barrier() #include <asm-generic/barrier.h> -- MST

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:06:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On s390 read_barrier_depends, smp_read_barrier_depends > smp_store_mb(), smp_mb__before_atomic and smp_mb__after_atomic match the > asm-generic variants exactly. Drop the local definitions and pull in > asm-generic/barrier.h instead. > > This is in preparation to refactoring this code area. > >

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:06:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On s390 read_barrier_depends, smp_read_barrier_depends > smp_store_mb(), smp_mb__before_atomic and smp_mb__after_atomic match the > asm-generic variants exactly. Drop the local definitions and pull in > asm-generic/barrier.h instead. > > This is in preparation to refactoring this code area. > >

Hi all, Although [smp_]read_barrier_depends() became part of READ_ONCE() in commit 76ebbe78f739 ("locking/barriers: Add implicit smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE()"), it still limps on in the Linux memory model with the sinister hope of attracting innocent new users so that it becomes impossible to remove altogether. Let's strike before it's too late: there's only

Hi all, This is version three of the patches I previously posted here: v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630173734.14057-1-will at kernel.org Changes since v2 include: * Actually add the barrier in READ_ONCE() for Alpha! * Implement Alpha's smp_load_acquire() using __READ_ONCE(), rather than the other

Hi everyone, This is the long-awaited version two of the patches I previously posted in November last year: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ I ended up parking the series while the READ_ONCE() implementation was being overhauled, but with that merged during the recent merge window and LTO patches being posted again [1], it was time for a refresh. The

Hi everyone, This is the long-awaited version two of the patches I previously posted in November last year: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ I ended up parking the series while the READ_ONCE() implementation was being overhauled, but with that merged during the recent merge window and LTO patches being posted again [1], it was time for a refresh. The