On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 01:26:05AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Paul, could you review this patch please?
> > > Documentation/memory-barriers.txt says that unlock has a weaker
> > > uni-directional barrier, but in practice srcu_read_unlock calls
> > > smp_mb().
> > >
> > > Is it OK to rely on this? If not, can I add
> > > smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock (making it an empty macro for now)
> > > so we can avoid an actual extra smp_mb()?
> >
> > Please use smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock(). After all, it was not
> > that long ago that srcu_read_unlock() contained no memory barriers,
> > and perhaps some day it won't need to once again.
> >
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
>
> Thanks!
> Something like this will be enough?
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/srcu.h b/include/linux/srcu.h
> index c114614..9b058ee 100644
> --- a/include/linux/srcu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/srcu.h
> @@ -237,4 +237,18 @@ static inline void srcu_read_unlock(struct srcu_struct *sp, int idx)
> __srcu_read_unlock(sp, idx);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock - ensure full ordering after srcu_read_unlock
> + *
> + * Converts the preceding srcu_read_unlock into a two-way memory barrier.
> + *
> + * Call this after srcu_read_unlock, to guarantee that all memory operations
> + * that occur after smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock will appear to happen after
> + * the preceding srcu_read_unlock.
> + */
> +static inline void smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock(void)
> +{
> + /* __srcu_read_unlock has smp_mb() internally so nothing to do here. */
> +}
> +
> #endif
Yep, that should do it!
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
