Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 11:41:39 -0800
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, corbet@lwn.net,
        mhocko@kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        will.deacon@arm.com, waiman.long@hpe.com, pjt@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] locking: Introduce smp_cond_acquire()
Message-ID: <20151203194139.GA5650@linux-uzut.site>
References: <20151203124010.627312076@infradead.org>
 <20151203124339.552838970@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151203124339.552838970@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1088
Lines: 29

On Thu, 03 Dec 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

>+/**
>+ * smp_cond_acquire() - Spin wait for cond with ACQUIRE ordering
>+ * @cond: boolean expression to wait for
>+ *
>+ * Equivalent to using smp_load_acquire() on the condition variable but employs
>+ * the control dependency of the wait to reduce the barrier on many platforms.
>+ *
>+ * The control dependency provides a LOAD->STORE order, the additional RMB
>+ * provides LOAD->LOAD order, together they provide LOAD->{LOAD,STORE} order,
>+ * aka. ACQUIRE.
>+ */
>+#define smp_cond_acquire(cond)	do {		\
>+	while (!(cond))				\
>+		cpu_relax();			\
>+	smp_rmb(); /* ctrl + rmb := acquire */	\
>+} while (0)

So this hides the fact that we actually are waiting on the cond, as opposed
to conditional acquiring. Could it be renamed to something like smp_waitcond_acquire()?

Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/