[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100909094211.GA8404@ff.dom.local>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 09:42:11 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jesse@...ira.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: inet_add_protocol() can use cmpxchg()
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 11:23:57AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le jeudi 09 septembre 2010 ?? 09:08 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> > xactly, without "after some time" I couldn't tell this
> > either. Is seems some barriers might have been changed, but I might
> > be wrong. Anyway, it would be nice to have some comment on that in
> > the changelog.
>
> Jarek, cmpxchg() is a very strong primitive, as documented
> in Documentation/memory-barriers.txt :
>
> <begin of quote>
>
> Any atomic operation that modifies some state in memory and returns information
> about the state (old or new) implies an SMP-conditional general memory barrier
> (smp_mb()) on each side of the actual operation (with the exception of
> explicit lock operations, described later). These include:
>
> xchg();
> cmpxchg();
> ...
> These are used for such things as implementing LOCK-class and UNLOCK-class
> operations and adjusting reference counters towards object destruction, and as
> such the implicit memory barrier effects are necessary.
>
> <end of quote>
>
> Its not needed to document each cmpxchg() use, because of these
> strong requirements.
OK! I should remember this until "after some time". ;-)
Thanks for the explanation,
Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists