On 5/27/2016 5:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 05:10:36PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
On 5/26/2016 10:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
--- a/arch/tile/lib/spinlock_32.c
+++ b/arch/tile/lib/spinlock_32.c
@@ -72,10 +72,14 @@ void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock
if (next == curr)
return;
+ smp_rmb();
+
/* Wait until the current locker has released the lock. */
do {
delay_backoff(iterations++);
} while (READ_ONCE(lock->current_ticket) == curr);
+
+ smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(arch_spin_unlock_wait);
--- a/arch/tile/lib/spinlock_64.c
+++ b/arch/tile/lib/spinlock_64.c
@@ -72,10 +72,14 @@ void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock
if (arch_spin_next(val) == curr)
return;
+ smp_rmb();
+
/* Wait until the current locker has released the lock. */
do {
delay_backoff(iterations++);
} while (arch_spin_current(READ_ONCE(lock->lock)) == curr);
+
+ smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(arch_spin_unlock_wait);
The smp_rmb() are unnecessary for tile. We READ_ONCE next/curr from the
lock and compare them, so we know the load(s) are complete. There's no
microarchitectural speculation going on so that's that. Then we READ_ONCE
the next load on the lock from within the wait loop, so our load/load
ordering is guaranteed.
Does TILE never speculate reads? Because in that case the control
dependency already provides a full load->load,store barrier and you'd
want smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() to be a barrier() instead of
smp_rmb().
Yes, that's a good point. I didn't look at the definition of smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(),
but it certainly sounds like that's exactly a compiler barrier for tile. There is no load
speculation performed. The only out-of-order stuff that happens is in the memory
subsystem: stores will become visible in arbitrary order, and loads will arrive in
arbitrary order, but as soon as the result of a load is used in any other kind of
instruction, the instruction issue will halt until the pending load(s) for the instruction
operands are available.
--
Chris Metcalf, Mellanox Technologies
http://www.mellanox.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
