Messages in this thread | | | From | "Chen, Kenneth W" <> | Subject | RE: Synchronizing Bit operations V2 | Date | Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:13:35 -0800 |
| |
Christoph Lameter wrote on Thursday, March 30, 2006 5:09 PM > In general yes the caller should not be thinking about clear_bit having > any memory ordering at all. However for IA64 arch specific code the bit > operations must have a certain ordering semantic and it would be best that > these are also consistent. clear_bit is not a lock operation and may > f.e. be used for locking something.
OK, fine. Then please don't change smp_mb__after_clear_bit() for ia64. i.e., leave it alone as noop.
- Ken - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |