mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	tony.luck@intel.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: smp_store_mb() oddity..
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 19:17:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150701171755.GM3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwAjc017rHJ6pAJb5efr8a-Ydp+fCuU-e08-jaU8PhsXw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 09:39:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Peter/Ingo,
>  while resolving a conflict, I noticed that we have the generic
> default definition of "smp_store_mb()" be:
> 
>      do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0)
> 
> which looks pretty odd. Why? That "mb()" is a full memory barrier even
> on UP, yet this is clearly a smp barrier.
> 
> So I think that "mb()" should be "smp_mb()". Looking at other
> architecture definitions, most architectures already do that.

Agreed.

> I think this is just left-over from our previous (badly specified)
> "set_mb()", and that commit b92b8b35a2e3 ("locking/arch: Rename
> set_mb() to smp_store_mb()") just didn't notice. 

That commit was a sed script :-). but yes I should've noticed something
was up when looking at the result.

> Our  old set_mb()
> was already confused about whether it was a smp barrier or an IO
> barrier (eg ARM uses smp_mb, x86 has separate smp/up versions, but
> others dop the unconditional memory barrier).
> 
> I didn't change this in the merge, because it's not just the generic
> version where the conflict was, there's also powerpc, s390 and ia64
> that still have the non-smp version too. But some locking person
> should probably clean this up... Hint hint,

A quick git grep for smp_store_mb() users throws up all of 7 users, they
all would be fine with smp_mb(). Lemme go do that patch..

git grep -l "smp_store_mb.*\<mb();" | while read file; do sed -i
's/\(smp_store_mb.*\)\<mb();/\1smp_mb();/' $file; done

---
Subject: locking/arch: Make smp_store_mb() use smp_mb()

Linus noticed that there were a few smp_store_mb() implementations that
used mb(), which is inconsistent with the new naming.

Since all smp_store_mb() users really are about SMP ordering, not IO
ordering, change them all to be consistent.

Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
 arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h    | 2 +-
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h | 2 +-
 arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h    | 2 +-
 include/asm-generic/barrier.h      | 2 +-
 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h
index 843ba435e43b..39ed6515415f 100644
--- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ do {									\
 	___p1;								\
 })
 
-#define smp_store_mb(var, value)	do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0)
+#define smp_store_mb(var, value)	do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); smp_mb(); } while (0)
 
 /*
  * The group barrier in front of the rsm & ssm are necessary to ensure
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
index 51ccc7232042..5525268f35c0 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
 #define rmb()  __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory")
 #define wmb()  __asm__ __volatile__ ("sync" : : : "memory")
 
-#define smp_store_mb(var, value)	do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0)
+#define smp_store_mb(var, value)	do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); smp_mb(); } while (0)
 
 #ifdef __SUBARCH_HAS_LWSYNC
 #    define SMPWMB      LWSYNC
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
index e6f8615a11eb..a4dea6050c77 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
 #define smp_mb__before_atomic()		smp_mb()
 #define smp_mb__after_atomic()		smp_mb()
 
-#define smp_store_mb(var, value)		do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0)
+#define smp_store_mb(var, value)		do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); smp_mb(); } while (0)
 
 #define smp_store_release(p, v)						\
 do {									\
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
index e6a83d712ef6..d716aa564931 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/barrier.h
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
 #endif
 
 #ifndef smp_store_mb
-#define smp_store_mb(var, value)  do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); mb(); } while (0)
+#define smp_store_mb(var, value)  do { WRITE_ONCE(var, value); smp_mb(); } while (0)
 #endif
 
 #ifndef smp_mb__before_atomic

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-01 17:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-01 16:39 Linus Torvalds
2015-07-01 17:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-07-02  5:40   ` Heiko Carstens
2015-07-02 22:29   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=20150701171755.GM3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --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®