From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: andreas@gaisler.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, carlos@redhat.com,
software@gaisler.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Make sparcv8 work again on cas enabled hardware
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 10:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1478081121.7146.673.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161101.125117.2228115672691137607.davem@davemloft.net>
On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 12:51 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
> Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 17:46:41 +0100
>
> > On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 12:09 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 16:59:44 +0100
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 16:07 +0100, Andreas Larsson wrote:
> >> >> Any comments are most welcome. The spin lock based sparcv8 semaphore
> >> >> implementation is currently unchanged by this patchset, but I would say
> >> >> that that should go as well.
> >> >
> >> > Agreed.
> >>
> >> I think tossing out all of the ldstub based v8 code is not wise.
> >>
> >> I was envisioning adding code to use ldstub on v8 when CAS is not
> >> available in order to maintain the status quo of what worked and
> >> was functional before the changes which introduced this problem
> >> for v8 in the first place.
> >>
> >> Having that in place until the kernel-side atomics could be
> >> implemented, propagated, and supported in glibc would be a nice
> >> intermediate state compared to what we have now.
> >
> > How do you intend to make the synchronization primitives work whose
> > implementation requires a CAS and for which nobody has provided an
> > alternative implementation that does not require CAS?
>
> The pure userland version will do what has been done for decades,
> by using a spinlock that protects the word we want to do atomic
> operations upon. A hash table of spinlocks is another option.
I know about the available techniques; my question was rather aimed at
who's going to do the work, in which rough stages, and when.
An external table of locks does not work for process-shared
synchronization. Do you plan to not support that, and abort() when
someone tries to create a process-shared condvar, for example?
Or do you intend to write sparc-specific versions of all the concurrent
data structures that are process-shared? Note that in the new condvar,
for example, there's no unused space in pthread_cond_t that could be
used for a spinlock. So you'd have to reorganize quite a bit.
If you want sparc-specific versions, who's going to implement them, and
when? What do we do in the meantime?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-02 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-01 15:08 Andreas Larsson
2016-11-01 15:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] sparc32: Use cas for atomic_* operations and use general pthread_barrier_wait Andreas Larsson
2016-11-04 18:37 ` David Miller
2016-11-04 18:44 ` David Miller
2016-11-01 15:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] sparc32: Mark sendmsg and recvmsg system calls as unsupported Andreas Larsson
2016-11-01 17:28 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-11-02 11:38 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-11-02 12:49 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-11-04 18:36 ` David Miller
2016-11-01 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Make sparcv8 work again on cas enabled hardware Torvald Riegel
2016-11-01 16:09 ` David Miller
2016-11-01 16:46 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-01 16:51 ` David Miller
2016-11-02 10:05 ` Torvald Riegel [this message]
2016-11-02 11:29 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-11-02 15:32 ` David Miller
2016-11-02 22:33 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-03 2:52 ` David Miller
2016-11-03 15:39 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-03 17:22 ` David Miller
2016-11-03 18:41 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-11-03 20:33 ` David Miller
2016-11-03 21:29 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-11-03 22:25 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-04 10:28 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-11-04 15:23 ` David Miller
2016-11-04 13:55 ` Richard Henderson
2016-11-04 15:31 ` David Miller
2016-11-04 16:10 ` Richard Henderson
2016-11-04 14:04 ` Richard Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1478081121.7146.673.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=triegel@redhat.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=software@gaisler.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).