[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikO_BCyFvcp=VZXQK-AvAFSB7sxQS_4_=HW3bZi@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:53:37 +0000
From: Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, rostedt@...dmis.org,
peterz@...radead.org, jbaron@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, andi@...stfloor.org,
roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, avi@...hat.com, sam@...nborg.org,
ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vapier@...too.org,
cmetcalf@...era.com, dhowells@...hat.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
Hi Paul,
> What CPU family are we talking about here? For cache coherent CPUs,
> cache coherence really is supposed to work, even for mixed atomic and
> non-atomic instructions to the same variable.
Is there a specific situation you can think of where this would be a
problem? I have to admit to a certain amount of unease with the design
our hardware guys came up with, but I don't have a specific case where
it won't work, just cases where it is less than optimal.
--
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