Re: [PATCH v2 06/32] s390: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:42:44 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 04:03:39PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:20:42 +0100
> > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > 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.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h | 10 ++--------
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> > > > index 7ffd0b1..c358c31 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> > > > @@ -30,14 +30,6 @@
> > > >  #define smp_rmb()			rmb()
> > > >  #define smp_wmb()			wmb()
> > > >  
> > > > -#define read_barrier_depends()		do { } while (0)
> > > > -#define smp_read_barrier_depends()	do { } while (0)
> > > > -
> > > > -#define smp_mb__before_atomic()		smp_mb()
> > > > -#define smp_mb__after_atomic()		smp_mb()
> > > 
> > > As per:
> > > 
> > >   lkml.kernel.org/r/20150921112252.3c2937e1@mschwide
> > > 
> > > s390 should change this to barrier() instead of smp_mb() and hence
> > > should not use the generic versions.
> >  
> > Yes, we wanted to simplify this. Thanks for the reminder, I'll queue
> > a patch.
> 
> Could you base on my patchset maybe, to avoid conflicts,
> and I'll merge it?
> Or if it's just replacing these 2 with barrier() I can do this
> myself easily.

Probably the easiest solution if you do the patch yourself and
include it in your patch set. 

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux