[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090219122957.GB1747@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:29:57 +0100
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: smp.c && barriers (Was: [PATCH 1/4] generic-smp: remove single ipi fallback for smp_call_function_many())
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 01:20:31PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 11:17 -0800, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
> > > So what should happen is to move that smp_mb() from the x86
> > > generic IPI path to the x86 x2apic IPI path. (and turn it into
> > > an smp_wmb() - that should be enough - we dont care about future
> > > reads being done sooner than this point.)
> >
> > Ingo, smp_wmb() won't help. x2apic register writes can still
> > go ahead of the sfence. According to the SDM, we need a
> > serializing instruction or mfence. Our internal experiments
> > also proved this.
>
> ah, yes - i got confused about how an x2apic write can pass a
> _store_ fence.
And about how smp_wmb() doesn't emit a store fence ;)
--
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