On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:09 AM Reshetova, Elena
wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:04 AM Reshetova, Elena
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > > > > something poking kcov?
> > > > >
> > > > > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, t
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:04 AM Reshetova, Elena
> wrote:
> >
> > > Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > > > something poking kcov?
> > > >
> > > > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > > > recurse back into the kcov code. It loo
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:04 AM Reshetova, Elena
wrote:
>
> > Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > > something poking kcov?
> > >
> > > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > > recurse back into the kcov code. It looks like that's f
> Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > something poking kcov?
> >
> > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > recurse back into the kcov code. It looks like that's fine, given these
> > are only manipulated in setup/teardown paths, but
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 06:41:38PM +, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Yes, that's a very good suggestion.
> >
> > I suppose we can add smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() on the true branch.
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 7:41 PM Reshetova, Elena
wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > > Any additional ordering; like the one you have above; are not strictly
> > > > required for the proper functioning
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > Any additional ordering; like the one you have above; are not strictly
> > > required for the proper functioning of the refcount. Rather, you rely on
> > > additional ordering and w
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 09:02:42AM +, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> > > I suppose we can add smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() on the true branch.
> > > Then it reall does become rel_acq.
> > >
> > > A wee something like so (I couldn't find an arm64 refcount, even though
> > > I have distinct memories
> > I suppose we can add smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() on the true branch.
> > Then it reall does become rel_acq.
> >
> > A wee something like so (I couldn't find an arm64 refcount, even though
> > I have distinct memories of talk about it).
>
> In the end, arm and arm64 chose to use REFCOUNT_FULL
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:05 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > Any additional ordering; like the one you have above; are not strictly
> > > required for the proper functioning of the refc
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Any additional ordering; like the one you have above; are not strictly
> > required for the proper functioning of the refcount. Rather, you rely on
> > additional ordering and will need to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:07 PM Reshetova, Elena
wrote:
>
> > Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > > something poking kcov?
> > >
> > > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > > recurse back into the kcov code. It looks like that's fi
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 5:05 PM Alan Stern wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:51 PM Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >
> > > > KCOV uses refcounts in a very simple canonical way, so no hi
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:51 PM Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> > > KCOV uses refcounts in a very simple canonical way, so no hidden
> > > ordering implied.
> > >
> > > Am I missing something
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 01:29:11PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 12:45 PM Andrea Parri
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Am I missing something or refcount_dec_and_test does not in fact
> > > > provide
> Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > something poking kcov?
> >
> > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > recurse back into the kcov code. It looks like that's fine, given these
> > are only manipulated in setup/teardown paths, but
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:51 PM Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > KCOV uses refcounts in a very simple canonical way, so no hidden
> > ordering implied.
> >
> > Am I missing something or refcount_dec_and_test does not in fact
> > provide ACQ
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 1:38 PM Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> > atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference
> > counters with the following properties:
> > - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> > - a resou
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference
> counters with the following properties:
> - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> - a resource is freed upon counter reaching zero
> - once counter reaches
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 12:45 PM Andrea Parri
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Am I missing something or refcount_dec_and_test does not in fact
> > > provide ACQUIRE ordering?
> > >
> > > +case 5) - decrement-based RMW ops that return a v
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference
> counters with the following properties:
> - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> - a resource is freed upon counter reaching zero
> - once counter reaches
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:52:37AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
[...]
> > Am I missing something or refcount_dec_and_test does not in fact
> > provide ACQUIRE ordering?
> >
> > +case 5) - decrement-based RMW ops that return a value
> > +-
> > +
>
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:51 PM Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:27 AM Elena Reshetova
> wrote:
> >
> > atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference
> > counters with the following properties:
> > - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> > - a resour
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:27 AM Elena Reshetova
wrote:
>
> atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference
> counters with the following properties:
> - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> - a resource is freed upon counter reaching zero
> - once counter reaches zero,
24 matches
Mail list logo
