From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: [RFC 02/12] locking, rwsem: drop explicit memory barriers
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 21:19:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1454444369-2146-3-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)
Message-ID: <20160202201919.Uq6wPHcIN_Vq4GdfrHxIi5pm9mUjsHDYT-gyQzDh1YU@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454444369-2146-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org>
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
sh and xtensa seem to be the only architectures which use explicit
memory barriers for rw_semaphore operations even though they are not
really needed because there is the full memory barrier is always implied
by atomic_{inc,dec,add,sub}_return resp. cmpxchg. Remove them.
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
arch/sh/include/asm/rwsem.h | 14 ++------------
arch/xtensa/include/asm/rwsem.h | 14 ++------------
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/rwsem.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/rwsem.h
index a5104bebd1eb..f6c951c7a875 100644
--- a/arch/sh/include/asm/rwsem.h
+++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/rwsem.h
@@ -24,9 +24,7 @@
*/
static inline void __down_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- if (atomic_inc_return((atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) > 0)
- smp_wmb();
- else
+ if (atomic_inc_return((atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) <= 0)
rwsem_down_read_failed(sem);
}
@@ -37,7 +35,6 @@ static inline int __down_read_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
while ((tmp = sem->count) >= 0) {
if (tmp == cmpxchg(&sem->count, tmp,
tmp + RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS)) {
- smp_wmb();
return 1;
}
}
@@ -53,9 +50,7 @@ static inline void __down_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
tmp = atomic_add_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
(atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
- if (tmp == RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS)
- smp_wmb();
- else
+ if (tmp != RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS)
rwsem_down_write_failed(sem);
}
@@ -65,7 +60,6 @@ static inline int __down_write_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
tmp = cmpxchg(&sem->count, RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE,
RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
- smp_wmb();
return tmp == RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE;
}
@@ -76,7 +70,6 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
int tmp;
- smp_wmb();
tmp = atomic_dec_return((atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
if (tmp < -1 && (tmp & RWSEM_ACTIVE_MASK) == 0)
rwsem_wake(sem);
@@ -87,7 +80,6 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
*/
static inline void __up_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- smp_wmb();
if (atomic_sub_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
(atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) < 0)
rwsem_wake(sem);
@@ -108,7 +100,6 @@ static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
int tmp;
- smp_wmb();
tmp = atomic_add_return(-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, (atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
if (tmp < 0)
rwsem_downgrade_wake(sem);
@@ -119,7 +110,6 @@ static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
*/
static inline int rwsem_atomic_update(int delta, struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- smp_mb();
return atomic_add_return(delta, (atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
}
diff --git a/arch/xtensa/include/asm/rwsem.h b/arch/xtensa/include/asm/rwsem.h
index 249619e7e7f2..593483f6e1ff 100644
--- a/arch/xtensa/include/asm/rwsem.h
+++ b/arch/xtensa/include/asm/rwsem.h
@@ -29,9 +29,7 @@
*/
static inline void __down_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- if (atomic_add_return(1,(atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) > 0)
- smp_wmb();
- else
+ if (atomic_add_return(1,(atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) <= 0)
rwsem_down_read_failed(sem);
}
@@ -42,7 +40,6 @@ static inline int __down_read_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
while ((tmp = sem->count) >= 0) {
if (tmp == cmpxchg(&sem->count, tmp,
tmp + RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS)) {
- smp_wmb();
return 1;
}
}
@@ -58,9 +55,7 @@ static inline void __down_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
tmp = atomic_add_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
(atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
- if (tmp == RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS)
- smp_wmb();
- else
+ if (tmp != RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS)
rwsem_down_write_failed(sem);
}
@@ -70,7 +65,6 @@ static inline int __down_write_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
tmp = cmpxchg(&sem->count, RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE,
RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
- smp_wmb();
return tmp == RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE;
}
@@ -81,7 +75,6 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
int tmp;
- smp_wmb();
tmp = atomic_sub_return(1,(atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
if (tmp < -1 && (tmp & RWSEM_ACTIVE_MASK) == 0)
rwsem_wake(sem);
@@ -92,7 +85,6 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
*/
static inline void __up_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- smp_wmb();
if (atomic_sub_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
(atomic_t *)(&sem->count)) < 0)
rwsem_wake(sem);
@@ -113,7 +105,6 @@ static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
int tmp;
- smp_wmb();
tmp = atomic_add_return(-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, (atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
if (tmp < 0)
rwsem_downgrade_wake(sem);
@@ -124,7 +115,6 @@ static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
*/
static inline int rwsem_atomic_update(int delta, struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
- smp_mb();
return atomic_add_return(delta, (atomic_t *)(&sem->count));
}
--
2.7.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-02 20:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 20:19 [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 01/12] locking, rwsem: get rid of __down_write_nested Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 02/12] locking, rwsem: drop explicit memory barriers Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 03/12] locking, rwsem: introduce basis for down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 04/12] alpha, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 05/12] ia64, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 06/12] s390, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 07/12] sh, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 11:19 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-02-03 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:11 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 08/12] sparc, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 09/12] xtensa, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 10/12] x86, rwsem: simplify __down_write Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-03 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-09 14:40 ` David Howells
2016-06-09 14:40 ` David Howells
2016-06-09 17:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-10 16:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-06-10 16:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 11/12] x86, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` [RFC 11/12 v1] " Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 12/12] locking, rwsem: provide down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15 ` [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:56 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:56 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:28 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 14:41 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-10 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-10 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1454444369-2146-3-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@zankel.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).