[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150120003008.GA14445@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:30:08 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.19-rc3
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 12:47:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:57:37PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
[ . . . ]
> David Miller's call, actually.
>
> But the rule is that if it is an atomic read-modify-write operation and it
> returns a value, then the operation itself needs to include full memory
> barriers before and after (as in the caller doesn't need to add them).
> Otherwise, the operation does not need to include memory ordering.
> Since xchg(), atomic_xchg(), and atomic_long_xchg() all return a value,
> their implementations must include full memory barriers before and after.
>
> Pretty straightforward. ;-)
Hello again, Peter,
Were you going to push a patch clarifying this?
Thanx, Paul
--
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