From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755936AbbGQXc4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:32:56 -0400 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:52071 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753299AbbGQXcx (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 19:32:53 -0400 X-Helo: d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com X-MailFrom: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-RcptTo: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: mingo@kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com, "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 5/5] doc: Call out smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() transitivity Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:32:43 -0700 Message-Id: <1437175963-24681-5-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.1.5 In-Reply-To: <1437175963-24681-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20150717233224.GA24318@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1437175963-24681-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15071723-0009-0000-0000-00000C9194DC Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Paul E. McKenney" Although "full barrier" should be interpreted as providing transitivity, it is worth eliminating any possible confusion. This commit therefore adds "(including transitivity)" to eliminate any possible confusion. Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- 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 470c07c868e4..318523872db5 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -1858,11 +1858,12 @@ Similarly, the reverse case of a RELEASE followed by an ACQUIRE does not imply a full memory barrier. If it is necessary for a RELEASE-ACQUIRE pair to produce a full barrier, the ACQUIRE can be followed by an smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() invocation. This will produce a full barrier -if either (a) the RELEASE and the ACQUIRE are executed by the same -CPU or task, or (b) the RELEASE and ACQUIRE act on the same variable. -The smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() primitive is free on many architectures. -Without smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), the CPU's execution of the critical -sections corresponding to the RELEASE and the ACQUIRE can cross, so that: +(including transitivity) if either (a) the RELEASE and the ACQUIRE are +executed by the same CPU or task, or (b) the RELEASE and ACQUIRE act on +the same variable. The smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() primitive is free +on many architectures. Without smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(), the CPU's +execution of the critical sections corresponding to the RELEASE and the +ACQUIRE can cross, so that: *A = a; RELEASE M -- 1.8.1.5