[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1234874455.4744.96.camel@laptop>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:40:55 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Q: smp.c && barriers (Was: [PATCH 1/4] generic-smp: remove
single ipi fallback for smp_call_function_many())
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 10:29 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > It would be nice to have a comment which explains how can we miss the
> > first addition without read_barrier_depends(). And why only on alpha.
>
> Paul, care to once again enlighten us? The best I can remember is that
> alpha has split caches, and the rmb is needed for them to become
> coherent -- no other arch is crazy in exactly that way.
>
> But note that read_barrier_depends() is not quite a NOP for !alpha, it
> does that ACCESS_ONCE() thing, which very much makes a difference, even
> on x86.
I've been saying crazy stuff, read_barrier_depends() is a NOP, I got
confused with rcu_dereference(). My bad.
--
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