From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754864AbbBRTXw (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:23:52 -0500 Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.158]:41156 "EHLO e37.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753641AbbBRTXu (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:23:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:23:45 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Kirill Tkhai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Josh Poimboeuf Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [PATCH] sched: Add smp_rmb() in task rq locking cycles Message-ID: <20150218192345.GE5745@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20150217104516.12144.85911.stgit@tkhai> <1424170021.5749.22.camel@tkhai> <20150217121258.GM5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150217130523.GV24151@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150217160532.GW4166@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150217183636.GR5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150217215231.GK4166@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150218155334.GA26006@redhat.com> <20150218161112.GB5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150218163256.GA29123@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150218163256.GA29123@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15021819-0025-0000-0000-000008AB68D9 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 05:32:56PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 02/18, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 04:53:34PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > On 02/17, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > | mb | wmb | rmb | rbd | acq | rel | ctl | > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > mb | Y | | Y | y | Y | | Y + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > wmb | Y | | Y | y | Y | | Y + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > rmb | | | | | | | + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > rbd | | | | | | | + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > acq | | | | | | | + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > rel | Y | | Y | y | Y | | Y + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > ctl | | | | | | | + > > > > -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ > > > > > > OK, so "acq" can't pair with "acq", and I am not sure I understand. > > > > Please consider the table in the context of message passing; that is > > what Paul proposed. Your example from sysvsems, while interesting, would > > not fit the general scenario of message passing. > > Ah, yeeees, sorry. Somehow I completely missed that part of Paul's email. > > > This too illustrates a problem with that approach, people can't read, so > > they'll pick the wrong table to look at. > > At least we know that I certainly can't ;) Nobody can! ;-) Thanx, Paul