[ltt-dev] [URCU PATCH v4 2/2] cmm: do not generate code for smp_rmb/smp_wmb on x86_64

[compudj@krystal.dyndns.org (Mathieu Desnoyers)]

* Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini at redhat.com) wrote:
> Usually we can assume no accesses to write-combining memory occur,
> and also that there are no non-temporal load/stores (people would presumably
> write those with assembly or intrinsics and put appropriate lfence/sfence
> manually).  In this case rmb and wmb are no-ops on x86.  Define cmm_smp_rmb
> and cmm_smp_wmb to be the "common" operations, while leaving cmm_rmb
> and cmm_wmb in place for more sophisticated uses.

Merged. I added a lot of information to the changelog in the commit,
citing our references.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini at redhat.com>
> ---
>  urcu/arch/x86.h |   23 +++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/urcu/arch/x86.h b/urcu/arch/x86.h
> index 9e5411f..c1e2e07 100644
> --- a/urcu/arch/x86.h
> +++ b/urcu/arch/x86.h
> @@ -33,12 +33,27 @@ extern "C" {
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_HAVE_FENCE
>  #define cmm_mb()    asm volatile("mfence":::"memory")
> -#define cmm_rmb()   asm volatile("lfence":::"memory")
> -#define cmm_wmb()   asm volatile("sfence"::: "memory")
> +
> +/*
> + * Define cmm_rmb/cmm_wmb to "strict" barriers that may be needed when
> + * using SSE or working with I/O areas.  cmm_smp_rmb/cmm_smp_wmb are
> + * only compiler barriers, which is enough for general use.
> + */
> +#define cmm_rmb()     asm volatile("lfence":::"memory")
> +#define cmm_wmb()     asm volatile("sfence"::: "memory")
> +#define cmm_smp_rmb() cmm_barrier()
> +#define cmm_smp_wmb() cmm_barrier()
>  #else
>  /*
> - * Some non-Intel clones support out of order store. cmm_wmb() ceases to be a
> - * nop for these.
> + * We leave smp_rmb/smp_wmb as full barriers for processors that do not have
> + * fence instructions.
> + *
> + * An empty cmm_smp_rmb() may not be enough on old PentiumPro multiprocessor
> + * systems, due to an erratum.  The Linux kernel says that "Even distro
> + * kernels should think twice before enabling this", but for now let's
> + * be conservative and leave the full barrier on 32-bit processors.  Also,
> + * IDT WinChip supports weak store ordering, and the kernel may enable it
> + * under our feet; cmm_smp_wmb() ceases to be a nop for these processors.
>   */
>  #define cmm_mb()    asm volatile("lock; addl $0,0(%%esp)":::"memory")
>  #define cmm_rmb()   asm volatile("lock; addl $0,0(%%esp)":::"memory")
> -- 
> 1.7.6
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com