Re: [PATCH] mutex: Fix mutex_can_spin_on_owner

[Waiman Long]

On 07/19/2013 03:41 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2013, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 07/19/2013 02:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >    	rcu_read_lock();
> > > -	if (lock->owner)
> > > -		retval = lock->owner->on_cpu;
> > > +	owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
> > > +	if (owner)
> > > +		retval = owner->on_cpu;
> > >    	rcu_read_unlock();
> > >    	/*
> > >    	 * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just
> > > acquired
> > I am fine with this change. However, the compiler is smart enough to
> > not do two memory accesses to the same memory location. So this will
> > not change the generated code. Below is the relevant x86 code for
> > that section of code:
> That's true for your particular compiler, but it's not guaranteed at
> all. So it matters even when your compiler generates the same
> code. Others might not. There is a world outside of x8664.
>
> Thanks,
>
> 	tglx

I supposed that only the gcc compiler can be used to build Linux kernel 
as the kernel source uses a lot of features specific to gcc. 
Optimizations like these are done by the front end of the compiler which 
should be universal across all the architecture. So what I want to say 
is that there is nothing specific to x86-64 or any architecture here. 
This is what a good compiler should do.

I am not against the fix as it makes the intention more clear. I am just 
saying that there won't be any performance change because of this.

Regards,
Longman
--
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/