lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS-feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL)
/
DateThu, 9 Aug 2007 09:14:23 -0400
FromChris Snook <>
Subject[PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
Digg This
As recent discussions[1], and bugs[2] have shown, there is a great deal of confusion about the expected behavior of atomic_read(), compounded by the fact that it is not the same on all architectures. Since users expect calls to atomic_read() to actually perform a read, it is not desirable to allow the compiler to optimize this away. Requiring the use of barrier() in this case is inefficient, since we only want to re-load the atomic_t variable, not everything else in scope.

This patchset makes the behavior of atomic_read uniform by removing the volatile keyword from all atomic_t and atomic64_t definitions that currently have it, and instead explicitly casts the variable as volatile in atomic_read(). This leaves little room for creative optimization by the compiler, and is in keeping with the principles behind "volatile considered harmful".

Busy-waiters should still use cpu_relax(), but fast paths may be able to reduce their use of barrier() between some atomic_read() calls.
-- Chris

1) http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/1/52
2) http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/8/122
\
ISP Services
Valid XHTML 1.0!\ /
Valid CSS! Last update: 2007-08-09 13:17    [W:0.933 / U:0.410 seconds]
©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans