lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[tip:locking/urgent] compiler.h: Remove ACCESS_ONCE()
Commit-ID:  b899a850431e2dd0943205a63a68573f3e312d0d
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/b899a850431e2dd0943205a63a68573f3e312d0d
Author: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
AuthorDate: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:38:23 +0000
Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:22:10 +0100

compiler.h: Remove ACCESS_ONCE()

There are no longer any kernelspace uses of ACCESS_ONCE(), so we can
remove the definition from <linux/compiler.h>.

This patch removes the ACCESS_ONCE() definition, and updates comments
which referred to it. At the same time, some inconsistent and redundant
whitespace is removed from comments.

Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: apw@canonical.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171127103824.36526-4-mark.rutland@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/compiler.h | 47 +++++++++++------------------------------------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 188ed9f..52e611a 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -220,21 +220,21 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
/*
* Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching reads or writes. The
* compiler is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of
- * READ_ONCE, WRITE_ONCE and ACCESS_ONCE (see below), but only when the
- * compiler is aware of some particular ordering. One way to make the
- * compiler aware of ordering is to put the two invocations of READ_ONCE,
- * WRITE_ONCE or ACCESS_ONCE() in different C statements.
+ * READ_ONCE and WRITE_ONCE, but only when the compiler is aware of some
+ * particular ordering. One way to make the compiler aware of ordering is to
+ * put the two invocations of READ_ONCE or WRITE_ONCE in different C
+ * statements.
*
- * In contrast to ACCESS_ONCE these two macros will also work on aggregate
- * data types like structs or unions. If the size of the accessed data
- * type exceeds the word size of the machine (e.g., 32 bits or 64 bits)
- * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() will fall back to memcpy(). There's at
- * least two memcpy()s: one for the __builtin_memcpy() and then one for
- * the macro doing the copy of variable - '__u' allocated on the stack.
+ * These two macros will also work on aggregate data types like structs or
+ * unions. If the size of the accessed data type exceeds the word size of
+ * the machine (e.g., 32 bits or 64 bits) READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() will
+ * fall back to memcpy(). There's at least two memcpy()s: one for the
+ * __builtin_memcpy() and then one for the macro doing the copy of variable
+ * - '__u' allocated on the stack.
*
* Their two major use cases are: (1) Mediating communication between
* process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,
- * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not fold, spindle, or otherwise
+ * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not fold, spindle, or otherwise
* mutilate accesses that either do not require ordering or that interact
* with an explicit memory barrier or atomic instruction that provides the
* required ordering.
@@ -327,29 +327,4 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
compiletime_assert(__native_word(t), \
"Need native word sized stores/loads for atomicity.")

-/*
- * Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching accesses. The compiler
- * is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of ACCESS_ONCE(),
- * but only when the compiler is aware of some particular ordering. One way
- * to make the compiler aware of ordering is to put the two invocations of
- * ACCESS_ONCE() in different C statements.
- *
- * ACCESS_ONCE will only work on scalar types. For union types, ACCESS_ONCE
- * on a union member will work as long as the size of the member matches the
- * size of the union and the size is smaller than word size.
- *
- * The major use cases of ACCESS_ONCE used to be (1) Mediating communication
- * between process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,
- * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not fold, spindle, or otherwise
- * mutilate accesses that either do not require ordering or that interact
- * with an explicit memory barrier or atomic instruction that provides the
- * required ordering.
- *
- * If possible use READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() instead.
- */
-#define __ACCESS_ONCE(x) ({ \
- __maybe_unused typeof(x) __var = (__force typeof(x)) 0; \
- (volatile typeof(x) *)&(x); })
-#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*__ACCESS_ONCE(x))
-
#endif /* __LINUX_COMPILER_H */
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-12 16:11    [W:0.069 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site