![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com> wrote: > cpu_relax() contains a barrier, so it should do the right thing. For non-smp > architectures, I'm concerned about interacting with interrupt handlers. Some > drivers do use atomic_* operations. I'm not sure that actually answers my question. Why not smp_rmb()? David - 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: 2007-08-11 10:53 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||