Re: +atomic-improve-atomic_inc_unless_negative-atomic_dec_unless_positive.patch added to -mm tree
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Thu Mar 21 2013 - 14:32:36 EST
On 03/21, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 18:08 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > OK... since nobody volunteered to make a patch, what do you think about
> > the change below?
> > It should "fix" atomic_add_unless() (only on x86) and optimize
> > atomic_inc/dec_unless.
> > With this change atomic_*_unless() can do the unnecessary mb() after
> > cmpxchg() fails, but I think this case is very unlikely.
> > And, in the likely case atomic_inc/dec_unless avoids the 1st cmpxchg()
> > which in most cases just reads the memory for the next cmpxchg().
> > Oleg.
> Hmm, cmpxchg() has different effect on MESI transaction, than a plain
But this doesn't matter?
We will do cmpxchg() anyway. Unless we can see that it will fail.
Or could you explain what I missed?
> maybe the 'hint' idea used in atomic_inc_not_zero_hint() could be used.
To me, it would be better to kill atomic_inc_not_zero_hint() or unify
unify it with atomic_inc_not_zero(). But this is another story.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/