On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:05:14PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 09:43:40AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 02:10:46PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > This variable is never written nor read remotely. Remove this confusion. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h > > > index f3947c49eee7..4266610b4587 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h > > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h > > > @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ static void rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult(struct rcu_node *rnp, > > > */ > > > static void rcu_report_exp_rdp(struct rcu_data *rdp) > > > { > > > - WRITE_ONCE(rdp->exp_deferred_qs, false); > > > + rdp->exp_deferred_qs = false; > > > > Are you sure that this can never be invoked from an interrupt handler? > > And that rdp->exp_deferred_qs is never read from an interrupt handler? > > If either can happen, then the WRITE_ONCE() does play a role, right? > > Well, the only effect I can imagine is that it can partly prevent from an > interrupt to report concurrently the quiescent state during the few > instructions before we mask interrupts and lock the node. > > That's a micro performance benefit that avoid a second call to > rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult() with the extra locking and early exit. I am not claiming that current compilers would mess this up, though I have learned to have great respect for what future compilers might do... > But then that racy interrupt can still happen before we clear exp_deferred_qs. > In this case __this_cpu_cmpxchg() would have been more efficient. Except that __this_cpu_cmpxchg() would have a possibility of failure, and thus an extra branch not needed by WRITE_ONCE(). Or am I missing your point here? I should hasten to add that getting rid of ->exp_deferred_qs is quite attractive! Thanx, Paul > > > rcu_report_exp_cpu_mult(rdp->mynode, rdp->grpmask, true); > > > } > > > > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > >