Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:14:21 -0700 (PDT) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures |
| |
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Chris Snook wrote:
> Because atomic operations are generally used for synchronization, which > requires volatile behavior. Most such codepaths currently use an inefficient > barrier(). Some forget to and we get bugs, because people assume that > atomic_read() actually reads something, and atomic_write() actually writes > something. Worse, these are architecture-specific, even compiler > version-specific bugs that are often difficult to track down.
Looks like we need to have lock and unlock semantics?
atomic_read()
which has no barrier or volatile implications.
atomic_read_for_lock
Acquire semantics?
atomic_read_for_unlock
Release semantics?
- 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/
| |