[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <521E5D58.5070708@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:28:08 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
CC: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Memory synchronization vs. interrupt handlers
On 08/28/2013 12:16 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> Russell, Peter, and Ingo:
>
> Can you folks enlighten us regarding this issue for some common
> architectures?
>
On x86, IRET is a serializing instruction; it guarantees hard
serialization of absolutely everything.
I would expect architectures that have weak memory ordering to put
appropriate barriers in the IRQ entry/exit code.
-hpa
--
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