Hello Peter,
On 10/14/19 3:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 07:49:58AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
The documentation in memory-barriers.txt claims that
smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic() are for atomic ops that do not return a
value.
This is misleading and doesn't match the example in atomic_t.txt,
and e.g. smp_mb__before_atomic() may and is used together with
cmpxchg_relaxed() in the wake_q code.
The purpose of e.g. smp_mb__before_atomic() is to "upgrade" a following
RMW atomic operation to a full memory barrier.
The return code of the atomic operation has no impact, so all of the
following examples are valid:
The value return of atomic ops is relevant in so far that
(traditionally) all value returning atomic ops already implied full
barriers. That of course changed when we added
_release/_acquire/_relaxed variants.
I've updated the Change description accordingly
1)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_add();
2)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_xchg_relaxed();
3)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_fetch_add_relaxed();
Invalid would be:
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_set();
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manf...@colorfullife.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <d...@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
---
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index 1adbb8a371c7..52076b057400 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1873,12 +1873,13 @@ There are some more advanced barrier functions:
(*) smp_mb__before_atomic();
(*) smp_mb__after_atomic();
- These are for use with atomic (such as add, subtract, increment and
- decrement) functions that don't return a value, especially when used for
- reference counting. These functions do not imply memory barriers.
+ These are for use with atomic RMW functions (such as add, subtract,
+ increment, decrement, failed conditional operations, ...) that do
+ not imply memory barriers, but where the code needs a memory barrier,
+ for example when used for reference counting.
- These are also used for atomic bitop functions that do not return a
- value (such as set_bit and clear_bit).
+ These are also used for atomic RMW bitop functions that do imply a full
s/do/do not/ ?
Sorry, yes, of course
+ memory barrier (such as set_bit and clear_bit).
>From 61c85a56994e32ea393af9debef4cccd9cd24abd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Manfred Spraul <manf...@colorfullife.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:33:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Update Documentation for _{acquire|release|relaxed}()
When adding the _{acquire|release|relaxed}() variants of some atomic
operations, it was forgotten to update Documentation/memory_barrier.txt:
smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic() is now indended for all RMW operations
that do not imply a full memory barrier.
1)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_add();
2)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_xchg_relaxed();
3)
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_fetch_add_relaxed();
Invalid would be:
smp_mb__before_atomic();
atomic_set();
Fixes: 654672d4ba1a ("locking/atomics: Add _{acquire|release|relaxed}() variants of some atomic operations")
Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manf...@colorfullife.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <d...@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
---
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index 1adbb8a371c7..08090eea3751 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1873,12 +1873,13 @@ There are some more advanced barrier functions:
(*) smp_mb__before_atomic();
(*) smp_mb__after_atomic();
- These are for use with atomic (such as add, subtract, increment and
- decrement) functions that don't return a value, especially when used for
- reference counting. These functions do not imply memory barriers.
+ These are for use with atomic RMW functions (such as add, subtract,
+ increment, decrement, failed conditional operations, ...) that do
+ not imply memory barriers, but where the code needs a memory barrier,
+ for example when used for reference counting.
- These are also used for atomic bitop functions that do not return a
- value (such as set_bit and clear_bit).
+ These are also used for atomic RMW bitop functions that do not imply a
+ full memory barrier (such as set_bit and clear_bit).
As an example, consider a piece of code that marks an object as being dead
and then decrements the object's reference count:
--
2.21.0
