seqcount: Introduce raw_write_seqcount_barrier()
authorPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:29:24 +0000 (14:29 +0200)
committerThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:09:56 +0000 (00:09 +0200)
Introduce raw_write_seqcount_barrier(), a new construct that can be
used to provide write barrier semantics in seqcount read loops instead
of the usual consistency guarantee.

raw_write_seqcount_barier() is equivalent to:

raw_write_seqcount_begin();
raw_write_seqcount_end();

But avoids issueing two back-to-back smp_wmb() instructions.

This construct works because the read side will 'stall' when observing
odd values. This means that -- referring to the example in the comment
below -- even though there is no (matching) read barrier between the
loads of X and Y, we cannot observe !x && !y, because:

 - if we observe Y == false we must observe the first sequence
   increment, which makes us loop, until

 - we observe !(seq & 1) -- the second sequence increment -- at which
   time we must also observe T == true.

Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Cc: ktkhai@parallels.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: juri.lelli@gmail.com
Cc: pang.xunlei@linaro.org
Cc: oleg@redhat.com
Cc: wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150617122924.GP3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
include/linux/seqlock.h

index c07e3a536099004ca9e1c62e5ac9bea6c922a733..486e685a226a82d5cb841e61fb2ebf1562c5adb7 100644 (file)
@@ -233,6 +233,47 @@ static inline void raw_write_seqcount_end(seqcount_t *s)
        s->sequence++;
 }
 
+/**
+ * raw_write_seqcount_barrier - do a seq write barrier
+ * @s: pointer to seqcount_t
+ *
+ * This can be used to provide an ordering guarantee instead of the
+ * usual consistency guarantee. It is one wmb cheaper, because we can
+ * collapse the two back-to-back wmb()s.
+ *
+ *      seqcount_t seq;
+ *      bool X = true, Y = false;
+ *
+ *      void read(void)
+ *      {
+ *              bool x, y;
+ *
+ *              do {
+ *                      int s = read_seqcount_begin(&seq);
+ *
+ *                      x = X; y = Y;
+ *
+ *              } while (read_seqcount_retry(&seq, s));
+ *
+ *              BUG_ON(!x && !y);
+ *      }
+ *
+ *      void write(void)
+ *      {
+ *              Y = true;
+ *
+ *              raw_write_seqcount_barrier(seq);
+ *
+ *              X = false;
+ *      }
+ */
+static inline void raw_write_seqcount_barrier(seqcount_t *s)
+{
+       s->sequence++;
+       smp_wmb();
+       s->sequence++;
+}
+
 /*
  * raw_write_seqcount_latch - redirect readers to even/odd copy
  * @s: pointer to seqcount_t