Received: by 10.223.185.111 with SMTP id b44csp238925wrg; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 04:18:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELujw3uuzUBJtmeMMyJoxCg18GH7GGAFiu1rYHsHnXPHsEHnQOykbADiBTWKQhQju06nivJ4 X-Received: by 10.101.96.141 with SMTP id t13mr769138pgu.427.1520597880046; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 04:18:00 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1520597880; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=GGsy7qwdQ7Jtn5f9Sa6SRCFgHfSf4EDXaEhkP55+ehSwQfh6X8Yd1Ozh3s1e6tsug6 veUlMCRmO6GUsaOMQWGtuoOePRFwerAwmdPlbxCgrn+pLtxSbrT8MBNetdrLPVmcdnCq BKIZY+R5Jyuf3k1u71gkooq9WOcbJ1/g+qYx6AbmprIatzEirGVFCv0jm4qhdqf1Pgir 4rQNfZ33dN69AkNdvvmowWmTfkUYddCwcejkc34+2JcdvOY2/MhsdbkhGbb20xxjYTJX 6Xz6bg4eo4rp8N3YHFagWAftqUw3sIAn8Eqv0D4EkTUd0WsZqO/05JN+o0aG3jd4LSSq 2eag== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=2+qSyRhRiMoPBcfutYdT6EBK0jsLYURHzuvXSE2tiro=; b=ZJOlYg/HP5WsGD8Ij9Sfj3RsUY5xdrn9GZhOA02Imr0WoRJkKMmhR9ku+HlWP4/Ny/ M3InXOkrsLuXDFJ++Ge7/x2cvdW+8NMJmNwjY7/SbvUZJWZp26JPIcVyFs4fwjKj29Ru pzu1l7mEIQRUaN8FO7QhlAWlipSQD0YQrvEUmQjvu8jQxl5LuZ+8sm62Oyp3KZS32x5p cdNhbau4tzdrOfqiwA5TifwMWEOH2zhjfHpieUxYYBSESYPpTHG+W8mzJqTIWAgD/mac Dx7X/Fb3EcrolntQ/tEqD0uW6fNx2WJ21GOfvkeGlsoBxuciHI13x+erv0OgPaM7R3nw h4Hw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=tdVNQnEF; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 88-v6si785460plc.131.2018.03.09.04.17.43; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 04:18:00 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=tdVNQnEF; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751066AbeCIMQx (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Mar 2018 07:16:53 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:38824 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750939AbeCIMQv (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2018 07:16:51 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id z9so3515541wmb.3 for ; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 04:16:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2+qSyRhRiMoPBcfutYdT6EBK0jsLYURHzuvXSE2tiro=; b=tdVNQnEFWrxxAu00JTnqSWENlLAEVzN01jX+Rb5QelbAwwCrpukq3oFC2XCrp8eEaO UHCDLDxlHxDJ5ySD38cMNFZL+6hYJ3Oi3MY/+4Q2YxWmgKoG99ES/8OaRZF6sVy/g17s NmfM20Yu4awHuYPMyXxyVQBEGyR4kjo246C8nV2DdoSKJw9cHrTImBmuT9zA4NS+7YmZ YIg2juZwY7ltrWsN9xG+lxBapgSDRbQEyT/iem5FidaCmsnjClFSzeozWz0XqaJy2owH tj+Hs+3TxGGGLodPaSSFcA14AmyIuOMkMb6+7aUxpnlZrDk5+BPm0zm7Gm+4trIwo49J fGIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2+qSyRhRiMoPBcfutYdT6EBK0jsLYURHzuvXSE2tiro=; b=VO/k4R7OJ9stNSRlODWPNuc+GOghumAT7oSURBGZKEvFZQCtB/eAcA6EBfr4s3WBZV 2aG8p24x02wPhSG9Q+WGik/rv0qPz+KFS7f8Zi/zFyZ/Nl9d4G/66Mm8QG09m1EESFU0 nzbRWiJGMFPHH3JVIh2KfXPRiGFQhHMQmr/qzZt7cEzEZ0EbMPGHOLF4NHbqxw9+2Bzv lUtb85Bj1Y2luF7ozCIEb0GQVNDuo4aHije802nywYFTWLOwU6u2YslZfxTGUhKJ2BaA l6IRLhrAZeGupJUUVx7qjQjU8jHjX2rcWL414M6OIGF71XL16KCaWMn1Z6XbEu+BsHl7 GmfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HI+DiodWQoT6bl9Tvxwx2N4k3tgUgGBrC0P4F9tHEoRcXGyVLH QJgzc0V1Axos+T7m7n+M/Aw= X-Received: by 10.28.13.136 with SMTP id 130mr2026743wmn.123.1520597810560; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 04:16:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from andrea (85.100.broadband17.iol.cz. [109.80.100.85]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 142sm1383738wmq.47.2018.03.09.04.16.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Mar 2018 04:16:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 13:16:43 +0100 From: Andrea Parri To: Palmer Dabbelt Cc: albert@sifive.com, Daniel Lustig , stern@rowland.harvard.edu, Will Deacon , peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com, npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, akiyks@gmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] riscv/spinlock: Strengthen implementations with fences Message-ID: <20180309121643.GA16716@andrea> References: <20180308210303.GA2897@andrea> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 02:11:12PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 13:03:03 PST (-0800), parri.andrea@gmail.com wrote: > >On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:33:49AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > >[...] > > > >>I'm going to go produce a new set of spinlocks, I think it'll be a bit more > >>coherent then. > >> > >>I'm keeping your other patch in my queue for now, it generally looks good > >>but I haven't looked closely yet. > > > >Patches 1 and 2 address a same issue ("release-to-acquire"); this is also > >expressed, more or less explicitly, in the corresponding commit messages: > >it might make sense to "queue" them together, and to build the new locks > >on top of these (even if this meant "rewrite all of/a large portion of > >spinlock.h"...). > > I agree. IIRC you had a fixup to the first pair of patches, can you submit > a v2? I've just sent it (with updated changelog). Andrea