[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <546B694D.3080604@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 07:44:13 -0800
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca" <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"heiko.carstens@...ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"mikey@...ling.org" <mikey@...ling.org>,
"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"donald.c.skidmore@...el.com" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
"matthew.vick@...el.com" <matthew.vick@...el.com>,
"geert@...ux-m68k.org" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"romieu@...zoreil.com" <romieu@...zoreil.com>,
"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"nic_swsd@...ltek.com" <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"michael@...erman.id.au" <michael@...erman.id.au>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"schwidefsky@...ibm.com" <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add lightweight memory barriers fast_rmb() and fast_wmb()
On 11/18/2014 01:57 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Alexander Duyck
>> These patches introduce two new primitives for synchronizing cache-enabled
>> memory writes and reads. These two new primitives are:
>>
>> fast_rmb()
>> fast_wmb()
> Not sure I like the names.
> If the aim is to sync data into the local cache so that hardware
> that is doing cache-snooping accesses sees the data then maybe
> local_rmb() and local_wmb()
Yeah, that is the general consensus. I am planning to change them to
coherent_rmb() and coherent_wmb().
> IIRC read_barrier_depends() is a nop on everything except alpha.
> Maybe add the default if it isn't defined by the MD file?
>
> David
>
From my patch the only two I saw define it were alpha and blackfin. It
is already defined in asm-generic, the rest is just clean-up since I
suspect some of the arch tree barrier.h calls just borrowed from
asm-generic without sorting out what became redundancies.
Thanks,
Alex
--
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