From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: c++std-parallel@accu.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
p796231 <Peter.Sewell@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
"mark.batty@cl.cam.ac.uk" <Mark.Batty@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"michaelw@ca.ibm.com" <michaelw@ca.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [c++std-parallel-1632] Re: Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach!
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 16:22:38 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1505211607040.27315@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150520181647.GU6776@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi,
On Wed, 20 May 2015, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > I'm not sure... you'd require the compiler to perform static analysis of
> > > loops to determine the state of the machine when they exit (if they exit!)
> > > in order to show whether or not a dependency is carried to subsequent
> > > operations. If it can't prove otherwise, it would have to assume that a
> > > dependency *is* carried, and it's not clear to me how it would use this
> > > information to restrict any subsequent dependency removing optimisations.
> >
> > It'd just convert consume to acquire.
>
> It should not need to, actually.
[with GCC hat, and having only lightly read your document]
Then you need to provide language or at least informal reasons why the
compiler is allowed to not do that. Without that a compiler would have to
be conservative, if it can't _prove_ that a dependency chain is stopped,
then it has to assume it hasn't.
For instance I can't really make out easily what your document says about
the following simple situation (well, actually I have difficulties to
differ between what you're proposing as the good-new model of this all,
and what you're merely describing as different current states of affair):
char * fancy_assign (char *in) { return in; }
...
char *x, *y;
x = atomic_load_explicit(p, memory_order_consume);
y = fancy_assign (x);
atomic_store_explicit(q, y, memory_order_relaxed);
So, is there, or is there not a dependency carried from x to y in your
proposed model (and which rule in your document states so)? Clearly,
without any other language the compiler would have to assume that there is
(because the equivalent 'y = x' assignment would carry the dependency).
If it has to assume this, then the whole model is not going to work very
well, as usual with models that assume a certain less-optimal fact
("carries-dep" is less optimal for code generation purposes that
"not-carries-dep") unless very specific circumstances say it can be
ignored.
Ciao,
Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-21 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-20 0:55 Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach! Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 1:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-20 2:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-20 2:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 11:47 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-20 12:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 15:46 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-20 15:54 ` Andrew Haley
2015-05-20 18:16 ` [c++std-parallel-1632] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 14:22 ` Michael Matz [this message]
2015-05-21 15:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 16:17 ` Michael Matz
2015-05-21 18:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 18:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 19:24 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-21 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 20:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-21 22:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-22 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-22 10:43 ` Richard Kenner
2015-05-22 13:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-22 13:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-26 17:37 ` [c++std-parallel-1641] " Torvald Riegel
2015-05-22 17:30 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-22 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 13:18 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 13:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 13:37 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 13:44 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-05-20 14:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 14:15 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-05-20 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 15:46 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 14:02 ` [c++std-parallel-1624] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 2:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 7:34 ` [c++std-parallel-1614] " Jens Maurer
2015-05-20 9:03 ` Richard Biener
2015-05-20 12:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 12:01 ` [c++std-parallel-1616] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-26 17:08 ` [c++std-parallel-1611] " Torvald Riegel
2015-05-27 1:41 ` [c++std-parallel-1651] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-14 0:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-09-22 17:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <CAPUmR1aqV_cQWjE8qC9x2sfmW-1ocKKMtCgNbjZH0cJ-AO2WTg@mail.gmail.com>
2015-09-23 23:26 ` [c++std-parallel-2008] " 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=alpine.LSU.2.20.1505211607040.27315@wotan.suse.de \
--to=matz@suse.de \
--cc=Mark.Batty@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Peter.Sewell@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=c++std-parallel@accu.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelw@ca.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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).