On 06-Mar 20:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 05:01:50PM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > +struct util_est {
> > + unsigned int enqueued;
> > + unsigned int ewma;
> > +#define UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT 2
> > +};
>
> > + ue = READ_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est);
>
> > + WRITE_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est, ue);
>
> That is actually quite dodgy... and relies on the fact that we have the
> 8 byte case in __write_once_size() and __read_once_size()
> unconditionally. It then further relies on the compiler DTRT for 32bit
> platforms, which is generating 2 32bit loads/stores.
>
> The advantage is of course that it will use single u64 loads/stores
> where available.
Yes, that's mainly an "optimization" for 64bit targets... but perhaps
the benefits are negligible.
Do you prefer to keep more "under control" the generated code by using
two {READ,WRITE}_ONCEs?
IMO here we can also go with just the WRITE_ONCEs. I don't see a case
for the compiler to mangle load/store. While the WRITE_ONCE are still
required to sync with non rq-lock serialized code.
But... maybe I'm missing something... ?
--
#include <best/regards.h>
Patrick Bellasi
