Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-91737-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Message-ID: <tencent_9882B228F292088CDD68F10CF1C228742009@qq.com>
From: linke li <lilinke99@qq.com>
To: joel@joelfernandes.org
Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	dave@stgolabs.net,
	frederic@kernel.org,
	jiangshanlai@gmail.com,
	josh@joshtriplett.org,
	lilinke99@qq.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	paulmck@kernel.org,
	qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com,
	quic_neeraju@quicinc.com,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Fix rcu_torture_pipe_update_one()/rcu_torture_writer() data race and concurrency bug
Date: Tue,  5 Mar 2024 14:24:20 +0800
In-Reply-To: <f3624f39-bbb1-451d-8161-8518e4108d8e@joelfernandes.org>
References: <f3624f39-bbb1-451d-8161-8518e4108d8e@joelfernandes.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Anyway, a slightly related/different question:
> 
> Should that:
> WRITE_ONCE(rp->rtort_pipe_count, rp->rtort_pipe_count + 1);
> 
> Be:
> WRITE_ONCE(rp->rtort_pipe_count, READ_ONCE(rp->rtort_pipe_count) + 1);
> 
> ?

Hi, Joel. Sorry, I am not very sure about this. I do a little research on
it.

I looked through all code in kernel that looks like this, both kinds are
used. I also try to compile this file with and without the READ_ONCE in
WRITE_ONCE using gcc-9. Their binary is just the same. 

Thus I think in the current compiler version, they do not have a big
difference, but if the compiler wants to optimize more, maybe the latter
one is better.