From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753626AbcALWKS (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:10:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57738 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753580AbcALWKO (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:10:14 -0500 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:10:10 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Cc: Davidlohr Bueso , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "Paul E. McKenney" , the arch/x86 maintainers , Davidlohr Bueso , "H. Peter Anvin" , virtualization Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] x86: faster mb()+other barrier.h tweaks Message-ID: <1452635935-5439-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Mutt-Fcc: =sent Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl $0,(%%e/rsp) that we use on older CPUs. So let's use the locked variant everywhere - helps keep the code simple as well. While I was at it, I found some inconsistencies in comments in arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h I hope I'm not splitting this up too much - the reason is I wanted to isolate the code changes (that people might want to test for performance) from comment changes approved by Linus, from (so far unreviewed) comment change I came up with myself. Lightly tested on my system. Michael S. Tsirkin (3): x86: drop mfence in favor of lock+addl x86: drop a comment left over from X86_OOSTORE x86: tweak the comment about use of wmb for IO arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) -- MST