On 2017/07/06 7:32, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 07:15:24AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> On 2017/07/05 10:32:49 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
>>>>> So I cannot go with "volatile", but let's see if I can do something
>>>>> better than the gcc intrinsics.
>>>>
>>>> And if the litmus7 guys don't have anything for me, I can always write a
>>>> script to do the conversions. So either way, we will have kernel-style
>>>> notation at some point. ;-)
>>>
>>> And it turns out that the contents of a second "{}" in a litmus7 test
>>> is pulled directly into the output code, so an easy change. ;-)
>>
>> Good news!
>>
>> So __atomic_thread_fence() will also be replaced with smp_mb() in
>> the litmus tests? That will reduce the width of the tables and eliminate
>> the need for the hspece adjustments in one-column layout.
>
> Oops, I forgot to push! Done now.
>
> And yes, there is now smp_mb() in the litmus tests and the tables.
I'll take a look later.
As I mentioned earlier, __atomic_load_n() and __atomic_store_n() seem
to have fairly large overheads (on x86). You might want to see the changes
in the resulting statistics and reflect them in the text.
Thanks, Akira
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe perfbook" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
