[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710181904540.29362@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:06:09 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: LFENCE instruction (was: [rfc][patch 3/3] x86: optimise barriers)
> > > > You already must not place any data structures into WC memory --- for
> > > > example, spinlocks wouldn't work there.
> > >
> > > What do you mean "already"?
> >
> > I mean "in current kernel" (I checked it in 2.6.22)
>
> Ahh, that's not "current kernel", though ;)
>
> 4071c718555d955a35e9651f77086096ad87d498
>
> > So drivers can't assume that wmb() works on write-combining memory.
>
> Drivers should be able to assume that wmb() orders _everything_ (except
> some whacky Altix thing, which I really want to fold under wmb at some
> point anyway).
>
> So I decided that old x86 semantics isn't right, and now it really is a
> lock op / sfence everywhere.
I see. I'm just curious --- is there any real usage for WC memory, except
graphics card memory?
Mikulas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists