From 87ef2a2c5fd5fe839ca5af0054e40436adab6024 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Emilio G. Cota" Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 03:26:40 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] atomics: emit an smp_read_barrier_depends() barrier only for Alpha and Thread Sanitizer For correctness, smp_read_barrier_depends() is only required to emit a barrier on Alpha hosts. However, we are currently emitting a consume fence unconditionally, and most compilers currently treat consume and acquire fences as equivalent. Fix it by keeping the consume fence if we're compiling with Thread Sanitizer, since this might help prevent false warnings. Otherwise, only emit the barrier for Alpha hosts. Note that we still guarantee that smp_read_barrier_depends() is a compiler barrier. Backports commit c983895258a771f8a5e4a53950bfb7fd2216651c from qemu --- qemu/include/qemu/atomic.h | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/qemu/include/qemu/atomic.h b/qemu/include/qemu/atomic.h index 4f360050..17f38ba9 100644 --- a/qemu/include/qemu/atomic.h +++ b/qemu/include/qemu/atomic.h @@ -42,7 +42,17 @@ void _ReadWriteBarrier(void); #define smp_wmb() ({ barrier(); __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_RELEASE); barrier(); }) #define smp_rmb() ({ barrier(); __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE); barrier(); }) +/* Most compilers currently treat consume and acquire the same, but really + * no processors except Alpha need a barrier here. Leave it in if + * using Thread Sanitizer to avoid warnings, otherwise optimize it away. + */ +#if defined(__SANITIZE_THREAD__) #define smp_read_barrier_depends() ({ barrier(); __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_CONSUME); barrier(); }) +#elsif defined(__alpha__) +#define smp_read_barrier_depends() asm volatile("mb":::"memory") +#else +#define smp_read_barrier_depends() barrier() +#endif /* Weak atomic operations prevent the compiler moving other * loads/stores past the atomic operation load/store. However there is