On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:44:07AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:38:50PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Just wanted to call your attention to some pretty cool and pretty serious
> > litmus tests that Andrii did as part of his BPF ring-buffer work:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I find:
>
> smp_wmb()
> smp_store_release()
>
> a _very_ weird construct. What is that supposed to even do?
Indeed, and I asked about that in my review of the patch containing the
code. It -could- make sense if there is a prior read and a later store:
r1 = READ_ONCE(a);
WRITE_ONCE(b, 1);
smp_wmb();
smp_store_release(&c, 1);
WRITE_ONCE(d, 1);
So a->c and b->c is smp_store_release() and b->d is smp_wmb(). But if
there were only stores, the smp_wmb() would suffice. And if there wasn't
the trailing store, smp_store_release() would suffice.
But that would at least want a comment, in my opinion. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
