On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:05:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 07:06:54AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > The current state in the C++ committee is that marking variables > > carrying dependencies is the way forward. This is of course not what > > the Linux kernel community does, but it should not be hard to have a > > -fall-variables-dependent or some such that causes all variables to be > > treated as if they were marked. Though I was hoping for only pointers. > > Are they -sure- that they -absolutely- need to carry dependencies > > through integers??? > > What's 'need'? :-) Turning off all dependency-killing optimizations on all pointers is likely a non-event. Turning off all dependency-killing optimizations on all integers is not the road to happiness. So whatever "need" might be, it would need to be rather earthshaking. ;-) It is probably not -that- hard to convert to pointers, even if they are indexing multiple arrays. > I'm thinking __ktime_get_fast_ns() is better off with a dependent load > than it is with an extra smp_rmb(). > > Yes we can stick an smp_rmb() in there, but I don't like it. Like I > wrote earlier, if I wanted a control dependency, I'd have written one. No argument here. But it looks like we are going to have to tell the compiler. Thanx, Paul
