Thread (85 messages) 85 messages, 12 authors, 2016-01-11

[PATCH v2 17/32] arm: define __smp_xxx

From: mst@redhat.com (Michael S. Tsirkin)
Date: 2016-01-04 20:13:08
Also in: linux-arch, linux-mips, linux-s390, linux-sh, linux-um, linuxppc-dev, lkml, sparclinux, virtualization

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
quoted
On Sat, Jan 02, 2016 at 11:24:38AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
quoted
My only concern is that it gives people an additional handle onto a
"new" set of barriers - just because they're prefixed with __*
unfortunately doesn't stop anyone from using it (been there with
other arch stuff before.)

I wonder whether we should consider making the smp memory barriers
inline functions, so these __smp_xxx() variants can be undef'd
afterwards, thereby preventing drivers getting their hands on these
new macros?
That'd be tricky to do cleanly since asm-generic depends on
ifndef to add generic variants where needed.

But it would be possible to add a checkpatch test for this.
Wasn't the whole purpose of these things for 'drivers' (namely
virtio/xen hypervisor interaction) to use these?
My take out from discussion with you was that virtualization is probably
the only valid use-case.  So at David Miller's suggestion there's a
patch later in the series that adds virt_xxxx wrappers and these are
then used by virtio xen and later maybe others.
And I suppose most of virtio would actually be modules, so you cannot do
what I did with preempt_enable_no_resched() either.

But yes, it would be good to limit the use of these things.
Right so the trick is checkpatch warns about use of
__smp_xxx and hopefully people are not crazy enough
to use virt_xxx variants for non-virtual drivers.

-- 
MST
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help