From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
1vier1@web.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic(): Update Documentation
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:22:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191107112200.GA11587@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65a187c2-80de-2c6f-5f80-48c51f973d08@colorfullife.com>
Hi Manfred,
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 08:23:03PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> From 8d2b219794221e3ef1a1ec90e0f4fe344af9a55d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:33:26 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/5] smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic(): Update Documentation
>
> When adding the _{acquire|release|relaxed}() variants of some atomic
> operations, it was forgotten to update Documentation/memory_barrier.txt:
>
> smp_mb__before_atomic and smp_mb__after_atomic can be combined with
> all RMW operations that do not imply memory barriers.
>
> In order to avoid that this happens again:
> Remove the paragraph from Documentation/memory_barrier.txt, the functions
> are sufficiently documented in Documentation/atomic_{t,bitops}.txt
>
> Fixes: 654672d4ba1a ("locking/atomics: Add _{acquire|release|relaxed}() variants of some atomic operations")
>
> Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
> Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> ---
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 20 +-------------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> index 1adbb8a371c7..16dfb4cde1e1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> @@ -1873,25 +1873,7 @@ There are some more advanced barrier functions:
> (*) smp_mb__before_atomic();
> (*) smp_mb__after_atomic();
>
> - These are for use with atomic (such as add, subtract, increment and
> - decrement) functions that don't return a value, especially when used for
> - reference counting. These functions do not imply memory barriers.
> -
> - These are also used for atomic bitop functions that do not return a
> - value (such as set_bit and clear_bit).
> -
> - As an example, consider a piece of code that marks an object as being dead
> - and then decrements the object's reference count:
> -
> - obj->dead = 1;
> - smp_mb__before_atomic();
> - atomic_dec(&obj->ref_count);
> -
> - This makes sure that the death mark on the object is perceived to be set
> - *before* the reference counter is decremented.
> -
> - See Documentation/atomic_{t,bitops}.txt for more information.
> -
> + See Documentation/atomic_{t,bitops}.txt for information.
>
> (*) dma_wmb();
> (*) dma_rmb();
Thanks, I much prefer this approach:
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-07 11:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-20 12:33 [PATCH 0/5] V3: Clarify/standardize memory barriers for ipc Manfred Spraul
2019-10-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic(): Update Documentation Manfred Spraul
2019-11-01 16:49 ` Will Deacon
2019-11-06 19:23 ` Manfred Spraul
2019-11-07 11:22 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2019-10-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] ipc/mqueue.c: Remove duplicated code Manfred Spraul
2019-10-22 22:43 ` Andrew Morton
2019-10-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] ipc/mqueue.c: Update/document memory barriers Manfred Spraul
2019-10-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] ipc/msg.c: Update and document " Manfred Spraul
2019-10-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] ipc/sem.c: Document and update " Manfred Spraul
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=20191107112200.GA11587@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=1vier1@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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®