From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, josh@joshtriplett.org,
dvhltc@us.ibm.com, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
dhowells@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC patch] introduce sys_membarrier(): process-wide memory barrier (v9)
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:08:51 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1267121331.6328.30.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100225175121.GA6658@Krystal>
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 12:51 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> But... either way we chose, we can extend the system call flags and parameters
> as needed, so I think it really should not be part of this initial
> implementation.
I agree here too.
If you have two different tasks doing lockless RCU or what not on shared
memory, it's best to stick with the mb() on the reader side. Yeah, it
makes the performance go down, but heck, I'm really worried about the
crazy complexity that wound need to go into the kernel to prevent this.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-25 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-12 22:46 Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-15 19:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-02-16 0:57 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-02-22 18:38 ` Chris Friesen
2010-02-22 21:23 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-24 9:10 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-24 15:22 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-25 5:33 ` Nick Piggin
2010-02-25 16:53 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-25 17:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-02-25 17:51 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-25 18:00 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-02-25 18:20 ` Add this to tip (was: Re: [RFC patch] introduce sys_membarrier(): process-wide memory barrier (v9)) Steven Rostedt
2010-02-25 18:08 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2010-02-26 5:08 ` [RFC patch] introduce sys_membarrier(): process-wide memory barrier (v9) Nick Piggin
2010-02-26 5:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-02-24 17:29 ` Darren Hart
2010-02-25 5:22 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1267121331.6328.30.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=nmiell@comcast.net \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®