lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v4.4
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 05:30:29PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > I think I'll pull this, but then just make a separate commit to remove
> > all the bogus games with "control" dependencies that seem to have no
> > basis is reality.
>
> So the attached is what I committed in my tree. It took much longer to
> try to write the rationale than it took to actually remove the
> atomic_read_ctrl() functions, and even so I'm not sure how good that
> commit message is. But at least it tries to explain what's going on.
>
> Note the final part of the rationale:
>
> I may have to eat my words at some point, but in the absense of clear
> proof that alpha actually needs this, or indeed even an explanation of
> how alpha could _possibly_ need it, I do not believe these functions are
> called for.
>
> And if it turns out that alpha really _does_ need a barrier for this
> case, that barrier still should not be "smp_read_barrier_depends()".
> We'd have to make up some new speciality barrier just for alpha, along
> with the documentation for why it really is necessary.

For whatever it is worth, the patch looks good to me. The reasons I
could imagine why we might want to mark control dependencies are things
like documentation and tooling, but given that we currently only have a
very small number of them, it is hard to argue that this is of immediate
concern, if it is ever of concern.

Thanx, Paul



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-04 05:41    [W:0.142 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site