From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: Fix mutex_can_spin_on_owner
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:58:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51E9A861.4040803@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307192139140.4089@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
On 07/19/2013 03:41 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2013, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 07/19/2013 02:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> rcu_read_lock();
>>> - if (lock->owner)
>>> - retval = lock->owner->on_cpu;
>>> + owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
>>> + if (owner)
>>> + retval = owner->on_cpu;
>>> rcu_read_unlock();
>>> /*
>>> * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just
>>> acquired
>> I am fine with this change. However, the compiler is smart enough to
>> not do two memory accesses to the same memory location. So this will
>> not change the generated code. Below is the relevant x86 code for
>> that section of code:
> That's true for your particular compiler, but it's not guaranteed at
> all. So it matters even when your compiler generates the same
> code. Others might not. There is a world outside of x8664.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
I supposed that only the gcc compiler can be used to build Linux kernel
as the kernel source uses a lot of features specific to gcc.
Optimizations like these are done by the front end of the compiler which
should be universal across all the architecture. So what I want to say
is that there is nothing specific to x86-64 or any architecture here.
This is what a good compiler should do.
I am not against the fix as it makes the intention more clear. I am just
saying that there won't be any performance change because of this.
Regards,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-19 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-19 18:31 Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-19 18:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-07-19 19:08 ` Waiman Long
2013-07-19 19:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-07-19 19:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-07-19 20:58 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2013-07-25 12:18 ` Jan-Simon Möller
2013-07-20 11:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-19 19:36 ` Rik van Riel
2013-07-23 7:46 ` [tip:core/locking] mutex: Fix/ document access-once assumption in mutex_can_spin_on_owner() tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=51E9A861.4040803@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidlohr.bueso@hp.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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
Powered by JetHome