* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:

> +/**
>   * raw_write_seqcount_latch - redirect readers to even/odd copy
>   * @s: pointer to seqcount_t
> + *
> + * The latch technique is a multiversion concurrency control method that 
> allows
> + * queries during non atomic modifications. If you can guarantee queries 
> never
> + * interrupt the modification -- e.g. the concurrency is strictly between 
> CPUs
> + * -- you most likely do not need this.

Speling nit:

 triton:~/tip> git grep -i 'non-atomic' | wc -l
 160
 triton:~/tip> git grep -i 'non atomic' | wc -l
 21

so I guess 'non-atomic' wins?

> + *
> + * Where the traditional RCU/lockless data structures rely on atomic
> + * modifications to ensure queries observe either the old or the new state 
> the
> + * latch allows the same for non atomic updates. The trade-off is doubling 
> the
> + * cost of storage; we have to maintain two copies of the entire data
> + * structure.

s/non atomic/non-atomic

> + * The query will have a form like:
> + *
> + * struct entry *latch_query(struct latch_struct *latch, ...)
> + * {
> + *   struct entry *entry;
> + *   unsigned seq, idx;
> + *
> + *   do {
> + *           seq = latch->seq;
> + *           smp_rmb();
> + *
> + *           idx = seq & 0x01;
> + *           entry = data_query(latch->data[idx], ...);
> + *
> + *           smp_rmb();
> + *   } while (seq != latch->seq);

Btw., I realize this is just a sample, but couldn't this be written 
more optimally as:

        do {
                seq = READ_ONCE(latch->seq);
                smp_read_barrier_depends();

                idx = seq & 0x01;
                entry = data_query(latch->data[idx], ...);

                smp_rmb();
        } while (seq != latch->seq);

Note that there's just a single smp_rmb() barrier: the READ_ONCE() is 
there to make sure GCC doesn't calculate 'idx' from two separate 
reads, but otherwise there's a direct data dependency on latch->seq so 
no smp_rmb() is needed, only a data dependency barrier when doing the 
first lookup AFAICS?

(This doesn't matter on x86 where smp_rmb() is barrier().)

Thanks,

        Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to