Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless_dereference

2017-10-24 Thread Will Deacon
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:54:28AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:31:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > Also, could we please split this into three patches: > > > > > > #1: Add smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE() > > > #2: Convert all loc

Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless_dereference

2017-10-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:31:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > From: Will Deacon > > > > > > lockless_dereference is a nice idea, but its gained little traction in > > > kernel code since it's introduction three years ago. Thi

Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless_dereference

2017-10-24 Thread Will Deacon
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:31:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > From: Will Deacon > > > > lockless_dereference is a nice idea, but its gained little traction in > > kernel code since it's introduction three years ago. This is partly > > s/its/it > s/it's/its

Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless_dereference

2017-10-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: Will Deacon > > lockless_dereference is a nice idea, but its gained little traction in > kernel code since it's introduction three years ago. This is partly s/its/it s/it's/its > because it's a pain to type, but also because using READ_ONCE instead > will wo