From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Victor Kaplansky <VICTORK@il.ibm.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PPC dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: perf events ring buffer memory barrier on powerpc
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 08:20:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131102152048.GI4067@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131101103017.GF19466@laptop.lan>
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 11:30:17AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 02:28:14AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > This is a completely untenable position.
> >
> > Indeed it is!
> >
> > C/C++ never was intended to be used for parallel programming,
>
> And yet pretty much all kernels ever written for SMP systems are written
> in it; what drugs are those people smoking?
There was a time when I wished that the C/C++ standards people had added
concurrency to the language 30 years ago, but I eventually realized that
any attempt at that time would have been totally broken.
> Furthermore there's a gazillion parallel userspace programs.
Most of which have very unaggressive concurrency designs.
> > and this is
> > but one of the problems that can arise when we nevertheless use it for
> > parallel programming. As compilers get smarter (for some definition of
> > "smarter") and as more systems have special-purpose hardware (such as
> > vector units) that are visible to the compiler, we can expect more of
> > this kind of trouble.
> >
> > This was one of many reasons that I decided to help with the C/C++11
> > effort, whatever anyone might think about the results.
>
> Well, I applaud your efforts, but given the results I think the C/C++
> people are all completely insane.
If it makes you feel any better, they have the same opinion of all of
us who use C/C++ for concurrency given that the standard provides no
guarantee.
> > > How do the C/C++ people propose to deal with this?
> >
> > By marking "ptr" as atomic, thus telling the compiler not to mess with it.
> > And thus requiring that all accesses to it be decorated, which in the
> > case of RCU could be buried in the RCU accessors.
>
> This seems contradictory; marking it atomic would look like:
>
> struct foo {
> unsigned long value;
> __atomic void *ptr;
> unsigned long value1;
> };
>
> Clearly we cannot hide this definition in accessors, because then
> accesses to value* won't see the annotation.
#define __rcu __atomic
Though there are probably placement restrictions for __atomic that
current use of __rcu doesn't pay attention to.
> That said; mandating we mark all 'shared' data with __atomic is
> completely untenable and is not backwards compatible.
>
> To be safe we must assume all data shared unless indicated otherwise.
Something similar to the compiler directives forcing twos-complement
interpretation of signed overflow could be attractive. Not sure what
it would do to code generation, though.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-03 4:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 120+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-22 23:54 perf events ring buffer memory barrier on powerpc Michael Neuling
2013-10-23 7:39 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-23 14:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-23 14:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-25 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-25 20:31 ` Michael Neuling
2013-10-27 9:00 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-28 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-28 10:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-28 12:38 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-28 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-28 16:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-28 20:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-28 20:58 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-29 10:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-29 10:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-29 10:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-29 20:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-29 19:27 ` Vince Weaver
2013-10-30 10:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-30 11:48 ` James Hogan
2013-10-30 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 13:19 ` [tip:perf/core] tools/perf: Add required memory barriers tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 13:50 ` Vince Weaver
2013-11-06 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 14:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 14:55 ` Vince Weaver
2013-11-06 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 15:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 14:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 16:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 17:31 ` Vince Weaver
2013-11-06 18:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-07 8:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-07 14:27 ` Vince Weaver
2013-11-07 15:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-11 16:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-11 21:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 21:23 ` perf events ring buffer memory barrier on powerpc Michael Neuling
2013-10-30 9:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-30 11:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-30 14:52 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-30 15:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-30 17:14 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-30 17:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-31 6:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 13:12 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-11-02 16:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-02 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-31 6:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 14:25 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-11-02 17:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-02 17:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-03 14:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-03 15:17 ` [RFC] arch: Introduce new TSO memory barrier smp_tmb() Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-03 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-11-03 20:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-03 22:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-03 23:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-11-04 10:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-04 11:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-04 16:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-04 16:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-04 19:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-04 19:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-04 20:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-04 20:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-05 14:05 ` Will Deacon
2013-11-05 14:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-05 18:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 11:00 ` Will Deacon
2013-11-06 12:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 12:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-11-06 13:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-06 18:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-06 19:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-07 11:17 ` Will Deacon
2013-11-07 13:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-07 23:50 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2013-11-04 11:05 ` Will Deacon
2013-11-04 16:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-03 20:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-11-03 22:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-03 17:07 ` perf events ring buffer memory barrier on powerpc Will Deacon
2013-11-03 22:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-04 9:57 ` Will Deacon
2013-11-04 10:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 16:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-02 17:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 16:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-02 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-30 13:28 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-30 15:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-30 18:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-30 19:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-31 4:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-31 4:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-31 9:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-31 15:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-31 15:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-01 9:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 10:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-02 15:20 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2013-11-04 9:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-04 10:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-31 9:59 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-31 12:28 ` David Laight
2013-10-31 12:55 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-10-31 15:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-11-01 16:06 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-11-01 16:25 ` David Laight
2013-11-01 16:30 ` Victor Kaplansky
2013-11-03 20:57 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-11-02 15:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-28 19:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-29 14:06 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf: Fix perf ring buffer memory ordering tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-08 20:46 perf events ring buffer memory barrier on powerpc Mikulas Patocka
[not found] ` <OF667059AA.7F151BCC-ONC2257CD3.0036CFEB-C2257CD3.003BBF01@il.ibm.com>
2014-05-09 12:20 ` Mikulas Patocka
2014-05-09 13:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20131102152048.GI4067@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=VICTORK@il.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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).