From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751921AbbH1LgX (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2015 07:36:23 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:55905 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751728AbbH1LgW (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2015 07:36:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 13:36:14 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Boqun Feng Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , "Paul E. McKenney" , Waiman Long Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] atomics: introduce arch_atomic_op_{acquire,release,fence} helpers Message-ID: <20150828113614.GC16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1440730099-29133-1-git-send-email-boqun.feng@gmail.com> <1440730099-29133-3-git-send-email-boqun.feng@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1440730099-29133-3-git-send-email-boqun.feng@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:48:16AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > Some architectures may have their special barriers for acquire, release > and fence semantics, general memory barriers(smp_mb__*_atomic()) in > __atomic_op_*() may be too strong, so arch_atomic_op_*() helpers are > introduced for architectures to provide their own version helpers to > build different variants based on _relaxed variants. > > Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng > --- > include/linux/atomic.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/atomic.h b/include/linux/atomic.h > index 00a5763..622255b 100644 > --- a/include/linux/atomic.h > +++ b/include/linux/atomic.h > @@ -34,20 +34,33 @@ > * The idea here is to build acquire/release variants by adding explicit > * barriers on top of the relaxed variant. In the case where the relaxed > * variant is already fully ordered, no additional barriers are needed. > + * > + * Besides, if an arch has a special barrier for acquire/release, it could > + * implement its own arch_atomic_op_* and use the same framework for building > + * variants > */ > +#ifndef arch_atomic_op_acquire > #define __atomic_op_acquire(op, args...) \ > ({ \ > typeof(op##_relaxed(args)) __ret = op##_relaxed(args); \ > smp_mb__after_atomic(); \ > __ret; \ > }) > +#else > +#define __atomic_op_acquire arch_atomic_op_acquire > +#endif Not really a fan of this, its not consistent with the existing #ifndef guard style.