[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004021244140.3634@i5.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 12:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-arm@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] kgdb: Use atomic operators which use barriers
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> All that matters is that the above kind of while loop must work. The
> architecture needs to do whatever it needs to do to make it work. End of
> discussion. If on ARM6 that means "smp_mb()", then that's an ARM6
> implementation issue.
Put another way: from a kernel standpoint, cpu_relax() in _no_ way implies
a memory barrier. That has always been true, and that continues to be
true.
But Linux does expect that if some other CPU modifies a memory location,
then we _will_ see that modification eventually. If the CPU needs help to
do so, then cpu_relax() needs to do that. Again - this has nothing to do
with memory barriers. It's just a basic requirement.
Linus
--
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