Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6/7] xen/9pfs: receive responses

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:13:59PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > +
> > > > +       ring = container_of(work, struct xen_9pfs_dataring, work);
> > > > +       priv = ring->priv;
> > > > +
> > > > +       while (1) {
> > > > +               cons = ring->intf->in_cons;
> > > > +               prod = ring->intf->in_prod;
> > > > +               rmb();
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Is this rmb() or mb()? (Or, in fact, virt_XXX()?) You used mb() in the
> > > previous patch.
> >  
> > I think they should all be virt_XXX, thanks.
> 
> regarding mb() vs. rmb(), give a look at the workflow at the end of
> docs/misc/9pfs.markdown, under "Ring Usage".

That is not what Boris meant. He meant that you should use the
virt_ variants instead of the rmb() or wmb().

The reason that on UP kernels the rmb() and wmb() can be converted
to NOPs. While that is OK for a UP kernel it is not good in virtualization
as we need those barriers regardless of the flavor of the kernel.

> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel