Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 17:53:58 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3]: documentation,atomic: Add new documents
Message-ID: <20170801165357.GC12027@arm.com>
References: <20170726124750.vktrn5zi2gmpzfru@tardis>
 <20170731090535.rjgnoewqg7mhzr55@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20170731110403.ou3zqsp3uviqorkz@tardis>
 <20170731174345.GL3730@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20170801090121.edo7mekhw3sann4h@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20170801101900.GB8702@arm.com>
 <20170801114744.evjjfviqhu5kgu7v@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20170801121713.GH8702@arm.com>
 <20170801161412.GW3730@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20170801164200.oczql3m4f3zn6rin@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170801164200.oczql3m4f3zn6rin@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 685
Lines: 15

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:42:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 09:14:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > So if ARM really needs the litmus test with smp_rmb() to be allowed,
> > we need to adjust the Linux-kernel memory model appropriately.  Which
> > means that one of us needs to reach out to the usual suspects.  Would
> > you like to do that, or would you like me to?
> 
> I'm really sad ARM8.1 LSE breaks this stuff.. It is rather counter
> intuitive (then again, we _are_ talking barriers).

I can upgrade smp_rmb to smp_mb if I have to, but I still think that
code using smp_rmb() to order an operation that doesn't return a value is
weird.

Will