On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 01:15:51PM -0800, Tim Chen wrote: >> Michel, are you planning to do an implementation of >> load-acquire/store-release functions of various architectures? > > A little something like this: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=138386254111507 > > It so happens we were working on that the past week or so due to another > issue ;-) Haha, awesome, I wasn't aware of this effort. Tim: my approach would be to provide the acquire/release operations in arch-specific include files, and have a default implementation using barriers for arches who don't provide these new ops. That way you make it work on all arches at once (using the default implementation) and make it fast on any arch that cares. >> Or is the approach of arch specific memory barrier for MCS >> an acceptable one before load-acquire and store-release >> are available? Are there any technical issues remaining with >> the patchset after including including Waiman's arch specific barrier? I don't want to stand in the way of Waiman's change, and I had actually taken the same approach with arch-specific barriers when proposing some queue spinlocks in the past; however I do feel that this comes back regularly enough that having acquire/release primitives available would help, hence my proposal. That said, earlier in the thread Linus said we should probably get all our ducks in a row before going forward with this, so... -- Michel "Walken" Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>