mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>
Cc: Jerry Jiang <wjiang@resilience.com>,
	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>, Zan Lynx <zlynx@acm.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: why are some atomic_t's not volatile, while most are?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 08:37:27 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708090836070.10666@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46BA2D72.9060202@redhat.com>

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Chris Snook wrote:

> Jerry Jiang wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 02:47:53 -0400
> > Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Chris Friesen wrote:
> > > > Chris Snook wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is not a problem, since indirect references will cause the CPU to
> > > > > fetch the data from memory/cache anyway.
> > > > Isn't Zan's sample code (that shows the problem) already using indirect
> > > > references?
> > > Yeah, I misinterpreted his conclusion.  I thought about this for a while,
> > > and realized that it's perfectly legal for the compiler to re-use a value
> > > obtained from atomic_read.  All that matters is that the read itself was
> > > atomic.  The use (or non-use) of the volatile keyword is really more
> > > relevant to the other atomic operations.  If you want to guarantee a
> > > re-read from memory, use barrier().  This, incidentally, uses volatile
> > > under the hood.
> > >
> >
> >
> > So for example, without volatile
> >
> > int a = read_atomic(v);
> > int b = read_atomic(v);
> >
> > the compiler will optimize it as b = a, But with volatile, it will be forced
> > to fetch v's value from memory
> > again.
> >
> > So, come back our initial question,
> > include/asm-v850/atomic.h:typedef struct { int counter; } atomic_t;
> >
> > Why is it right without volatile?
>
> Because atomic_t doesn't promise a memory fetch every time.  It merely
> promises that any atomic_* operations will, in fact, be atomic.  For example,
> posted today:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/8/122

i'm sure that, when this is all done, i'll finally have an answer to
my original question, "why are some atomic_t's not volatile, while
most are?"

i'm almost scared to ask any more questions.  :-)

rday
-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================

  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-09 12:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-01 12:49 Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-06  4:35 ` Jerry Jiang
2007-08-06 14:12   ` Chris Snook
2007-08-07 15:51     ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-07 20:32       ` Chris Snook
2007-08-07 21:02         ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-07 21:19           ` Chris Snook
2007-08-07 21:38             ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-07 22:02               ` Chris Snook
2007-08-07 22:46                 ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-07 22:06               ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-08-07 22:49                 ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-07 22:32               ` Zan Lynx
2007-08-08  1:31                 ` Chris Snook
2007-08-08  4:50                   ` Chris Friesen
2007-08-08  6:47                     ` Chris Snook
2007-08-08  8:16                       ` Jerry Jiang
2007-08-08  8:27                       ` Jerry Jiang
2007-08-08 20:54                         ` Chris Snook
2007-08-09 12:37                           ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2007-08-09 12:52                             ` Chris Snook
2007-08-09 18:02                               ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-09 18:04                                 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-08  2:27         ` Jerry Jiang
2007-08-08  5:39           ` Chris Snook

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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0708090836070.10666@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=rpjday@mindspring.com \
    --cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
    --cc=csnook@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wjiang@resilience.com \
    --cc=zlynx@acm.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