Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx
- From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:43:56 +0800
- Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-metag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, user-mode-linux-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, adi-buildroot-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <20160106222337-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
- List-id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
- References: <1451572003-2440-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1451572003-2440-16-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20160105013648.GA1256@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com> <20160105085117.GA11858@redhat.com> <20160105095341.GA5321@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com> <20160105180938-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20160106015152.GA14605@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com> <20160106222337-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 10:23:51PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > Sorry, I don't understand - why do you have to do anything?
> > > I changed all users of smp_lwsync so they
> > > use __smp_lwsync on SMP and barrier() on !SMP.
> > >
> > > This is exactly the current behaviour, I also tested that
> > > generated code does not change at all.
> > >
> > > Is there a patch in your tree that conflicts with this?
> > >
> >
> > Because in a patchset which implements atomic relaxed/acquire/release
> > variants on PPC I use smp_lwsync(), this makes it have another user,
> > please see this mail:
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/89877
> >
> > in definition of PPC's __atomic_op_release().
> >
> >
> > But I think removing smp_lwsync() is a good idea and actually I think we
> > can go further to remove __smp_lwsync() and let __smp_load_acquire and
> > __smp_store_release call __lwsync() directly, but that is another thing.
> >
> > Anyway, I will modify my patch.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Boqun
>
>
> Thanks!
> Could you send an ack then please?
>
Sure, if you need one from me, feel free to add my ack for this patch:
Acked-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx>
Regards,
Boqun
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]