![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > > > although it's quite possible that (a) never makes any sense at all. > > Do you mean (b) never makes sense? Yes. > I suspect the best thing at this point is to move the sync in writeX() > before the store, as you suggest, and add an "eieio" before the load > in readX(). That does mean that we are then relying on driver writers > putting in the mmiowb() between a writeX() and a spin_unlock, but at > least that is documented. Yeah, that sounds reasonable. Linus - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-09-09 03:57 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||