From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Cc: Roman Pen <roman.penyaev@profitbricks.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] [RFC] workqueue: fix ghost PENDING flag while doing MQ IO
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 13:45:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160426174513.GM7822@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <571FA51F.2040702@hurleysoftware.com>
Hello, Peter.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:27:59AM -0700, Peter Hurley wrote:
> > It's unlikely to make any measureable difference. Is xchg() actually
> > cheaper than store + rmb?
>
> store + mfence (full barrier), yes. Roughly 2x faster.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/2/607
Ah, didn't know that. Thanks for the pointer.
> > I'm not necessarily against making all clearings of
> > PENDING to be followed by a rmb or use xhcg. Reasons 2-4 are pretty
> > weak tho.
>
> I agree 2 and 3 are not the best reasons.
> Actually, it looks that I'm in the minority anyway, and that style-wise,
> naked barrier is preferred.
As long as what's happening is clearly documented, I think either is
fine. I'm gonna go with Roman's mb patch for -stable fix but think
it'd be nice to have a separate patch to consolidate the paths which
clear PENDING and make them use xchg. If you can spin up a patch for
that, I'd be happy to apply it to wq/for-3.7.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-26 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-25 15:22 Roman Pen
2016-04-25 15:48 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-25 16:00 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-25 16:40 ` Roman Penyaev
2016-04-25 16:34 ` Roman Penyaev
2016-04-25 17:03 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-25 17:39 ` Roman Penyaev
2016-04-25 17:51 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-26 1:22 ` Peter Hurley
2016-04-26 15:15 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-26 17:27 ` Peter Hurley
2016-04-26 17:45 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2016-04-26 20:07 ` Peter Hurley
2016-04-27 5:50 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-04-27 19:05 ` Tejun Heo
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=20160426174513.GM7822@mtj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=roman.penyaev@profitbricks.com \
/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®